# UPDATED: ASUS Z370 and Z390 Motherboard Series - Official Support Thread. North America



## Jpmboy

*This thread is for sharing experience on the Z370 and Z390 platform and for support on all ASUS boards with these chipsets.
If requesting support, please try to use the following template (or at the very least have rig builder filled out):*​ 


Motherboard model:
UEFI Version:
CPU:
Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB:
GPU:
SSD/HDDs/Optical drives:
PSU:
USB Devices (model/version number):
Monitor:
CPU Cooler:
PC CASE:
Operating system: Microsoft Activated yes/no?
Drivers Installed (include version):
Any third Party temp/voltage software installed:
System Overclocked (provide details)?



*Z370 Boards:*

*ROG MAXIMUS X APEX*
*ROG STRIX Z370-E GAMING*
*ASUS PRIME Z370-A*
*ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC)*
*ROG STRIX Z370-I GAMING*
*ROG MAXIMUS X HERO*
*TUF Z370-PRO GAMING*
*TUF Z370-PLUS GAMING*
*ROG STRIX Z370-F GAMING*
*ROG STRIX Z370-H GAMING*
*PRIME Z370-P*
*ROG Maximus X Code*
*ROG Maximus X Formula*

Z390 Boards (See the ASUS Website for more)



*Prime Z390-A*
*Maximus Xi Hero (wifi)*
*ROG Strix Z390 Gaming-E*
*Maximus Xi Code*
*Maximus Xi Extreme*


Nov 13, 2017: New Bioses: https://www.overclock.net/t/1640168...-official-support-thread/100_20#post_26446009
Nov 15, 2017: Bios Patches: https://www.overclock.net/t/1640168...-official-support-thread/120_20#post_26449686
Feb 8, 2018: Bios Test Builds addressing using negative offset with adaptive voltage (below VID): https://www.overclock.net/forum/26714769-post1352.html
*
ROG Maximus Apex Extreme OC*

*Coffee-Lake batch info* via @aerotracks (in German)

Bios flashback for HeroWiFi: https://www.overclock.net/t/1640168...-official-support-thread/740_20#post_26527916
(correct name is M10Hwifi.cap)

*TweakTown Coffee Lake OC Guide

* *My Coffee Lake Basic OC Guide (pdf download)










*Intel specifies voltage limits in their Product Specification Sheets (PDFs). My experience is, running 1.52V vcore is much too high for watercooling, especially combined with transient load line overshoot (micro sec spikes). And as stated in the footnotes of the voltage tables, the 1.52V limit REQUIRES all other conditions are met. So, 1.52V may be "fine" if you never exceed the TDP and IAcc limits. Stick with low to mid 1.3V for 24/7 use.


----------



## Jpmboy

Reserved


----------



## chibi

Will Raja be publishing an Edge Up article on overclocking Coffee Lake? Or should we just use the Kaby Lake guide?


----------



## Jpmboy

whoa.. had this up for less than 30 min. just a core OC.. nice XTU score!
ASUS Apex X, 8700K @4.7a4.5


----------



## TMatzelle60

Is the Maximus X Hero (Wifi) a reliable well made motherboard? I always hear horror stories with asus rma and want to make sure i get a good board for my 8700K


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMatzelle60*
> 
> Is the Maximus X Hero (Wifi) a reliable well made motherboard? I always hear horror stories with asus rma and want to make sure i get a good board for my 8700K


Yes - it's a well made board. Lol, over a dozen ASUS boards in trhe past few years here.. not one broke - even with some stupid stuff being done to them.


----------



## chibi

On the ROG STRIX Z370-I GAMING BIOS page, it lists the 0426 and 5426 versions both updated on 2017/10/20. What's the difference between the two? If I intend to manually OC the system, is one BIOS preferred over the other?

Edit - NVM, Raja answered this question on one of the ROG Forum threads. "The only difference between them is that the 5426 build has ASUS Multicore Enhance enabled by default. Identical otherwise."


----------



## keyo

is it TUF Z370-PLUS GAMING gonna l have new bios for vrm stablity


----------



## [email protected]

Build 9418 for the Z370-P. Improves memory overclocking.


----------



## Jpmboy

I'm really surprised by the responsiveness of this platform... z370 and an 8700K is really quick!









and .. real-time ram timing adjustment!


----------



## keyo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Build 9418 for the Z370-P. Improves memory overclocking.


Mr raja how about z370 tuf gaming plus no update tq


----------



## [email protected]

Z370-P UEFI build 9419: improved OC for 2DPC configs.


----------



## Cirrus550

Motherboard model: Asus maximus hero x wi-fi
UEFI Version: 0505
CPU: Intel i5-8400
CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i v2

I've been runnig above system now just for few days.

I have been wondering really high (IMO) core VID values and thus high Vcore values with this 8400.

Straight out with default values asus MCE core VID and thus also Vcore goes up to 1.36 V when running prime. Disabling MCE and thus introducing power limiting those values drop to around 1.28 V.

These reading seem quite high compared to overcloked 8700k values.

I have only found one reference where to compare voltages i5-8400 should be running. 



 shows voltages below 1.2 when running MCE and all core and without those. Mobo they are running on video is Asus prime z370-a.

I guess i5-8400 can stand those voltages, but I would like to use this with "correct" voltages and no extra as they are not needed.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cirrus550*
> 
> Motherboard model: Asus maximus hero x wi-fi
> UEFI Version: 0505
> CPU: Intel i5-8400
> CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i v2
> 
> I've been runnig above system now just for few days.
> 
> I have been wondering really high (IMO) core VID values and thus high Vcore values with this 8400.
> 
> Straight out with default values asus MCE core VID and thus also Vcore goes up to 1.36 V when running prime. Disabling MCE and thus introducing power limiting those values drop to around 1.28 V.
> 
> These reading seem quite high compared to overcloked 8700k values.
> 
> I have only found one reference where to compare voltages i5-8400 should be running.
> 
> 
> 
> shows voltages below 1.2 when running MCE and all core and without those. Mobo they are running on video is Asus prime z370-a.
> 
> I guess i5-8400 can stand those voltages, but I would like to use this with "correct" voltages and no extra as they are not needed.


Hello

Each processor has a uniquely programmed VID table. To find the voltage programmed for your processor fully clear the BIOS, set MCE to disabled and LLC to Level 1. Do not change any other settings. The maximum voltage shown while under load will be the value Intel has programmed for that particular CPU. If you wish to use a lower voltage a manually entered negative offset will be required. The video you linked to also shows it is detrimental to performance to enable MCE when using a i5-8400 so I'm not sure why you want to enable it.


----------



## Cirrus550

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Each processor has a uniquely programmed VID table. To find the voltage programmed for your processor fully clear the BIOS, set MCE to disabled and LLC to Level 1. Do not change any other settings. The maximum voltage shown while under load will be the value Intel has programmed for that particular CPU. If you wish to use a lower voltage a manually entered negative offset will be required. The video you linked to also shows it is detrimental to performance to enable MCE when using a i5-8400 so I'm not sure why you want to enable it.


Hello and thanks for reply.

Basically this is the testing I have done. Except that LLC has been auto all the time.

I ran three test rounds just now. First LLC auto and the with LLC set to level 1. Both values in hwinfo the core VID went down about 0.09 V and Vcore same. For next test I set LLC back to auto and voltages stayed down. However I am fairly sure that value called Ring/LLC clock was 3.7 GHz at first run and after LLC 1 it went down to 3.5 GHz. And it was still 3.5 GHz when I set it back to auto.

Also current remedy for my running setup is exactly what you suggested. I have set -0.07 offset.

MCE itself does not raise voltages that I have noticed. VID request stays same and vcore stays same. It just removes power limit. This unit hits to power limits instantaneously with prime if MCE is disabled. Clocks drop to 3 GHz and voltage VID request and vcore drops.

Nonetheless I have MCE disabled and manually set 4095 powerlimits to keep 3.8 GHz under load.

I was not that familiar with concept of individual VIDs for units. Or the fact that there can be such huge difference. Maybe I'll just accept this and keep using the minus offset. System seems stable with even 0.1 minus offset.


----------



## Menthol

Hero X Wifi here with [email protected] 1.3v Gskill 4x8gb 3600cl16 1t, runs smooth as silk, this will be my daily use rig, Apex when they become available
Real time timing adjustments? , using memtweakit or is this Apex specific?


----------



## Yetyhunter

Subbed.
8700k with STRIX-E soon.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Hero X Wifi here with [email protected] 1.3v Gskill 4x8gb 3600cl16 1t, runs smooth as silk, this will be my daily use rig, Apex when they become available
> Real time timing adjustments? , using memtweakit or is this Apex specific?


It does run really smooth... I was hoping someone else would notice that. Very qquick and "clean".

[email protected]/4.4 --- 2x8GB GSkill 4400c19 @ 3866c16 vdimm 1.375V, SA 1.2, VCCIO 1.17 --- HCi 500%


Just a base to work from . Delidded the cpu last night, sealer dried over the day.. installed, temps now in the low 60s running RB2.54RC2 at 5.3 with 1.344V LLC 5 (load is 1.328V). Cache is still stock. I'm really liking this 6 core processor!


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Just a base to work from . Delidded the cpu last night, sealer dried over the day.. installed, temps now in the low 60s running RB2.54RC2 at *5.3* with 1.344V LLC 5 (load is *1.328V*). Cache is still stock. I'm really liking this 6 core processor!


Very impressive clock/voltage numbers.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Very impressive clock/voltage numbers.


I think it's just average for the 8700K.


----------



## Roms

Hi,

I'm using the Maximus X Hero with the 8700K. I am currently trying to move to Adaptive voltage but even after setting 1.260v as the adaptive voltage with +0.001 offset. HWiNFO64 reports my Vcore as 1.312 - 1.344V under light loads (web browsing, PUBG). Basically equal to the VID (1.315 - 1.350). I have LLC set to level 5 and even then the CPU only goes down to 1.28v during Cinebench and 1.296 under Prime95 26.6. I have set the IA AC/DC Load Line to 0.01 as per Kaby Lake/Skylake guides. I just think that 0.05 difference from what I set in the bios is too big. What else can I do to try? I have tried resetting CMOS and reflashing the 0505 bios.

Thank you.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Roms*
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm using the Maximus X Hero with the 8700K. I am currently trying to move to Adaptive voltage but even after setting 1.260v as the adaptive voltage with +0.001 offset. HWiNFO64 reports my Vcore as 1.312 - 1.344V under light loads (web browsing, PUBG). Basically equal to the VID (1.315 - 1.350). I have LLC set to level 5 and even then the CPU only goes down to 1.28v during Cinebench and 1.296 under Prime95 26.6. I have set the IA AC/DC Load Line to 0.01 as per Kaby Lake/Skylake guides. I just think that 0.05 difference from what I set in the bios is too big. What else can I do to try? I have tried resetting CMOS and reflashing the 0505 bios.
> 
> Thank you.


Hello

Try setting SVID Control to enabled.


----------



## sdch

I'm moving from 7700K/Z270I to 8700K/Z370I and noticed a few quirks:

1. If you set AVX offset to some value (e.g. -3), when you set it back to 0 the value doesn't actually change. You can verify this by stress testing with any AVX program and watching the multipliers drop. The only way to actually go back to 0 AVX offset is "Load Optimized Defaults" -> "Save and Exit" then go back into the bios and load your settings again.

2. The RTL and IO-L values are weird for identical memory timings. I went from 60/61/7/7 on Z270I to 68/68/14/14 on Z370I. As a result, the latency went from about 36-38 ns to 41-43 ns. VCCIO/VCCSA are tuned correctly and both systems are stable (stressapptest -W -s 3600). Here's a screenshot comparison (big thanks to @Jpmboy for sharing his Kaby Lake memory timings a while back):

7700K/Z270I:


8700K/Z370I:


Notes:
Motherboard: STRIX Z370-I
UEFI Version: 0426
CPU: i7-8700K
Memory: F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW, 2x8GB, @4133


----------



## Batman1982

i have the Maximus X Bios 0505

I use trident Z 4000 c18 32gb ( 4 Dimm )
all stable so far, but the write and copy value in aida is very bad.
read 58K read 30k copy 30
checked it with different values of Ram voltage, SA/IO but no way

then underclock the memory :/ 3800 not stable sometimes no boot

underclock to 3600 16-16-16-36 374 1T stable so far HCI is running at this time now ( 200% and no failure until now )
Aida climbs up
read 55k write 58k copy 52

maybe it´s an Bios issue or something similar.

anyone an idea? can it be the SA/IO Voltage?
whats is max safe value for this?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdch*
> 
> I'm moving from 7700K/Z270I to 8700K/Z370I and noticed a few quirks:
> 
> 1. If you set AVX offset to some value (e.g. -3), when you set it back to 0 the value doesn't actually change. You can verify this by stress testing with any AVX program and watching the multipliers drop. The only way to actually go back to 0 AVX offset is "Load Optimized Defaults" -> "Save and Exit" then go back into the bios and load your settings again.
> 
> 2. The RTL and IO-L values are weird for identical memory timings. I went from 60/61/7/7 on Z270I to 68/68/14/14 on Z370I. As a result, the latency went from about 36-38 ns to 41-43 ns. VCCIO/VCCSA are tuned correctly and both systems are stable (stressapptest -W -s 3600). Here's a screenshot comparison (big thanks to @Jpmboy for sharing his Kaby Lake memory timings a while back):
> 
> 7700K/Z270I:
> 
> 
> 8700K/Z370I:
> 
> 
> Notes:
> Motherboard: STRIX Z370-I
> UEFI Version: 0426
> CPU: i7-8700K
> Memory: F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW, 2x8GB, @4133


may be a bit high on the RTLs? what VDIMM are you using, training and eventual?


----------



## sdch

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> may be a bit high on the RTLs? what VDIMM are you using, training and eventual?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


DRAM Voltage is set to 1.45. Unfortunately, no separate training/eventual on this board.



Does anything look out of place with the timings?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdch*
> 
> DRAM Voltage is set to 1.45. Unfortunately, no separate training/eventual on this board.
> 
> 
> 
> Does anything look out of place with the timings?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


can't get 1T to run? you can try lowering tCWL by 1 or 2 notches. if it fails to post, it may be that's the best the kit can do on z370. 4133 is at the limit.


----------



## sdch

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> can't get 1T to run? you can try lowering tCWL by 1 or 2 notches. if it fails to post, it may be that's the best the kit can do on z370. 4133 is at the limit.


Yeah, I've never been able to post at 1T above DDR4-3466 with the ITX boards from Asus. This is with multiple G.Skill B-die kits. On an ATX board? It's just fine. Oh well, thanks for your help (I lurk the 24/7 stability thread and you guys are great).


----------



## Roms

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Try setting SVID Control to enabled.


It still runs at 1.312 with a game open while at the menu screen.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Roms*
> 
> It still runs at 1.312 with a game open while at the menu screen.


Hello

Is SVID Behavior set to Best Case?


----------



## Roms

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Roms*
> 
> It still runs at 1.312 with a game open while at the menu screen.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Is SVID Behavior set to Best Case?


Right now yes, I have tried all settings though and the result is the same.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Roms*
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm using the Maximus X Hero with the 8700K. I am currently trying to move to Adaptive voltage but even after setting 1.260v as the adaptive voltage with +0.001 offset. HWiNFO64 reports my Vcore as 1.312 - 1.344V under light loads (web browsing, PUBG). Basically equal to the VID (1.315 - 1.350). I have LLC set to level 5 and even then the CPU only goes down to 1.28v during Cinebench and 1.296 under Prime95 26.6. I have set the IA AC/DC Load Line to 0.01 as per Kaby Lake/Skylake guides. I just think that 0.05 difference from what I set in the bios is too big. What else can I do to try? I have tried resetting CMOS and reflashing the 0505 bios.
> 
> Thank you.


did you set IA load lines to 0.01, or 0.001? I'm pretty sure re; kbl it was 0.001 for early bios releases.


----------



## Roms

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> did you set IA load lines to 0.01, or 0.001? I'm pretty sure re; kbl it was 0.001 for early bios releases.


0.01 is the lowest I can set them to and yes I have them set to 0.01


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Roms*
> 
> 0.01 is the lowest I can set them to and yes I have them set to 0.01


yeah - I seem to get a bit of overshoot on vcore with adaptive, SVID on Auto, LLC5. Bios set to 1.325 and it loaded 100mV higher running HCi memtest. Manual override does not do this on my MB . Noticed just now.. need to verify.


----------



## Praz

Hello

Need to keep in mind the reported voltage inaccuracies depending on the software and physical connections of actual measurement. Meter leads connected at CPU vs HWInfo and CPU-Z

Adaptive voltage set to 1.35V
SVID Behavior - Best Case
SVID Support - Enabled
LLC - Level 5
IA AC/DC Load Lines - 0.01


----------



## bloot

There's a new 0420 bios for the Strix E/F

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-E-GAMING/HelpDesk_BIOS/
https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING/HelpDesk_BIOS/


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Need to keep in mind the reported voltage inaccuracies depending on the software and physical connections of actual measurement. Meter leads connected at CPU vs HWInfo and CPU-Z
> 
> Adaptive voltage set to 1.35V
> SVID Behavior - Best Case
> SVID Support - Enabled
> LLC - Level 5
> IA AC/DC Load Lines - 0.01


thanks Praz.








you're on the Max X Hero?
no SVID "best case" on bios 401 for the Max X Apex.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> thanks Praz.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you're on the Max X Hero?
> no SVID "best case" on bios 401 for the Max X Apex.


Hello

I'm using 0419 but this is on the Z370-A. I haven't set up the APEX yet. I thought I would check out the capabilities and downfalls of the lower end boards first.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> I'm using 0419 but this is on the Z370-A. I haven't set up the APEX yet. I thought I would check out the capabilities and downfalls of the lower end boards first.


Roger that.
Say - is it me, or is Fiery falling a bit behind with all these new platform launches?


----------



## thorksk8

I need help to overclock base 4.7 i have

XMP 3600 ddr profile
MCE off
sync all core 4.7
vcore 1.15
only this

My question is
I need LLC and other option ???
plz help


----------



## tknight

I am running the Maximus X Apex and have seen others running Bios 0501 in their screenshots. However I cannot find this version on the Apex website, only version 0401 is available for download.

Where can Bios 0501 be downloaded?


----------



## tiefox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> I am running the Maximus X Apex and have seen others running Bios 0501 in their screenshots. However I cannot find this version on the Apex website, only version 0401 is available for download.
> 
> Where can Bios 0501 be downloaded?


Where did you get an Apex ??? Im wating for this mobo for a week with my 8700k stored away in a drawer...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> I am running the Maximus X Apex and have seen others running Bios 0501 in their screenshots. However I cannot find this version on the Apex website, only version 0401 is available for download.
> 
> Where can Bios 0501 be downloaded?


IDK - I just flashed up to 0401 yesterday - been running 0214


----------



## jasjeet

Anyone know if there will be a cheaper ASus ITX z370 board releasing? Seems like they only have one model in the range of ITX boards so far and it's quite pricey.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> IDK - I just flashed up to 0401 yesterday - been running 0214


Yeah mine came with 0401 out of the box. Then I saw this screenshot and noticed the 0501 bios, but its not on the Apex site.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> Anyone know if there will be a cheaper ASus ITX z370 board releasing? Seems like they only have one model in the range of ITX boards so far and it's quite pricey.


Hello

I wouldn't expect any other Mini ITX boards being released less than the price of the Strix Z370-I Gaming. I also wold not consider $189.00 "pricey".


----------



## unkletom

Praz gets his Asus mobos for free in trade for certain services.


----------



## XPrecep

I can't figure out how to change VCCIN, I can't see the setting anywhere. Do I need to disable SVID in order to see the option, or do something else? Is this something we can't change on Z370 due to some part of the specification maybe? Help me out.


----------



## Jpmboy

there's no VCCIN on z370.


----------



## XPrecep

Ok. Why is that? I thought it was a pretty integral part of the VRM operation.

Also, is there a sensor for the VRM temp on the Hero? If so, what would it be labelled as in HwInfo64?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *XPrecep*
> 
> Ok. Why is that? I thought it was a pretty integral part of the VRM operation.
> 
> Also, is there a sensor for the VRM temp on the Hero? If so, what would it be labelled as in HwInfo64?


the sensor would be labeled vrm.


----------



## [email protected]

Wallpaper with the M X Apex: https://rog.asus.com/wallpapers/product-close-ups/


----------



## Yetyhunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Wallpaper with the M X Apex: https://rog.asus.com/wallpapers/product-close-ups/


The first one looks really nice. I just need a version for the STRIX-E.


----------



## [email protected]

Yeah, the lighting fell right on that day. Strix-E isn't suitable for that particular shot.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Wallpaper with the M X Apex: https://rog.asus.com/wallpapers/product-close-ups/


sweet:


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> there's no VCCIN on z370.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *XPrecep*
> 
> Ok. Why is that? I thought it was a pretty integral part of the VRM operation.
> 
> Also, is there a sensor for the VRM temp on the Hero? If so, what would it be labelled as in HwInfo64?


Yeah - why is that? No VCCIN? Is it not required? I am missing something...

Thanks !


----------



## Jpmboy

integrated vs non-integrated VR


----------



## [email protected]

Maximus 10 Apex UEFI build 0703


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Maximus 10 Apex UEFI build 0703


Thanks Raja.

Do you know what the changes/updates are in this bios version ?


----------



## Telstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Maximus 10 Apex UEFI build 0703


When is available in Europe?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Maximus 10 Apex UEFI build 0703


Thanks - flashed and running!
5.4GHz, AVX-2, cache 4.8, 3866c16 ram. core 1.425V, ram 1.4V, vccio 1,2V, vsa 1,225V. PLL bandwidth set to 1, IA AC and DC load lines to 0.01.









never seen numbers like this for daily settings. (i use the image processing module to test low load voltage/performance)


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Thanks - flashed and running!
> 5.4GHz, AVX-2, cache 4.8, 3866c16 ram. core 1.425V, ram 1.4V, vccio 1,2V, vsa 1,225V. PLL bandwidth set to 1, IA AC and DC load lines to 0.01.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> never seen numbers like this for daily settings. (i use the image processing module to test low load voltage/performance)


That's because there is no such thing as 5.4 ghz daily settings
That Image editing score is off the charts brother Jp


----------



## Menthol

My Hero Wifi is working very well for my daily PC, very happy, my 8700K is OK but hits a wall real fast on either volts or temps using an AIO even delidded but in all reality a 6 core 12 thread chip at all cores 4700 mhz is still a damn fast PC

Been searching for an Apex, only seen one for sale but was way to much so patiently waiting


----------



## Rhadamanthis

Hi guys, i have
evga 280 cooler
8700k
maximus x hero
2x8gb g.skill 3600 16 rgb

can help me to have 4.8 all core with lowet vcore possibile? i m noob


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rhadamanthis*
> 
> Hi guys, i have
> evga 280 cooler
> 8700k
> maximus x hero
> 2x8gb g.skill 3600 16 rgb
> 
> can help me to have 4.8 all core with lowet vcore possibile? i m noob


Here is a link to a Kaby Lake overclocking guide which will be very similar for Coffee Lake any questions feel free to ask








http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> My Hero Wifi is working very well for my daily PC, very happy, my 8700K is OK but hits a wall real fast on either volts or temps using an AIO even delidded but in all reality a 6 core 12 thread chip at all cores 4700 mhz is still a damn fast PC
> 
> Been searching for an Apex, only seen one for sale but was way to much so patiently waiting


what voltage are you running for 4.7? Or in other words... how far off the reservation have I taken my 8700K?


----------



## chibi

You guys know when the z370 apex will be hitting shelves? Only see pre-order right now at B&H.


----------



## Menthol

I think you are well on the reservation, although I am using an AIO my chip even delidded takes about 1.36 to reach stability & 4.7, I'm leaving this system as is, I have a second chip that does the same at about .05 v lower, sealant is curing at the moment
Waiting on an Apex as I don't want to be reinstalling my OS and apps, I see the Apex listed for pre order on B&H so hopefully soon I'll get some benching in


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I think you are well on the reservation, although I am using an AIO my chip even delidded takes about 1.36 to reach stability & 4.7, I'm leaving this system as is, I have a second chip that does the same at about .05 v lower, sealant is curing at the moment
> Waiting on an Apex as I don't want to be reinstalling my OS and apps, I see the Apex listed for pre order on B&H so hopefully soon I'll get some benching in


cool. Get the CPUs from "the Connection"?


----------



## Menthol

"retail"


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> "retail"


pc connection?


----------



## Feklar

I checked with B&H but they have no idea when they'll receive any. Considering it's not even listed on Asus's U.S. site, I think it's going to be a while. Probably closer to Thanksgiving or after.


----------



## NorCa

Hey guys!

Just ordered the z370-i gaming, anyone using this? How is it? I actually went auto mode on asus strix card being ITX and after ordering was like.. well I should have researched a bit before


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> pc connection?


Newegg and Amazon, both shipped before I could cancel one


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Newegg and Amazon, both shipped before I could cancel one


lol - don't know how you got either to send you one. Every time I checked it was OOS.


----------



## Rhadamanthis

Any updates for Maximus X Hero (no Wifi)?


----------



## bmg2

I can't find the "ASUS CPU overclocking temperature control" in the Maximus X Hero bios. Is it no longer supported, or am I just missing it?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bmg2*
> 
> I can't find the "ASUS CPU overclocking temperature control" in the Maximus X Hero bios. Is it no longer supported, or am I just missing it?


yeah - not on z370... It could be added to a bios update so let's keep asking for it.


----------



## bmg2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - not on z370... It could be added to a bios update so let's keep asking for it.


I wonder if the old Asus Thermal Control Tool would work with the 8700K/Maximus X Hero?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bmg2*
> 
> I wonder if the old Asus Thermal Control Tool would work with the 8700K/Maximus X Hero?


no, not the software version.


----------



## jasjeet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> I wouldn't expect any other Mini ITX boards being released less than the price of the Strix Z370-I Gaming. I also wold not consider $189.00 "pricey".


£180-190 ($240) for a board is pricey. My previous ITX boards were in the £120 range, and I'm not really seeing any benefits of these new boards except the RGB lights. Wonder when rgb will die.


----------



## bl4ckdot

How does the VRMs heatsink of the Formula compare to the Code without watercooling ? I do not plan to have a custom loop for now but we never know.
Is it still better even on air cooling ? Or is it really not worth it ?
Thank you


----------



## Menthol

I don't think you have to worry about VRM, case airflow should be enough

Where is all the posts? There must be more people with Z370

My Hero Wifi is running fantastic at 5.0/[email protected], 3600 15 16 16 32 1T, Aura has a few issues with FCU, that's about it for initial issues so I just have them turned off, when it wakes from sleep mode Aura settings have changed

Still waiting for an Apex to bench


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I don't think you have to worry about VRM, case airflow should be enough
> 
> Where is all the posts? There must be more people with Z370
> 
> My Hero Wifi is running fantastic at 5.0/[email protected], 3600 15 16 16 32 1T, Aura has a few issues with FCU, that's about it for initial issues so I just have them turned off, when it wakes from sleep mode Aura settings have changed
> 
> Still waiting for an Apex to bench


Well I'm asking this because I don't know how efficient the cooler of the Formula is when there is no watercooling. I prefer the colors and the backplate of the Formula but if the Code is better at cooling VRM, I'll take it. This is my priority over how the boards look.
Though, if the temps difference is under 5°C or so, I may take Formula


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Well I'm asking this because I don't know how efficient the cooler of the Formula is when there is no watercooling. I prefer the colors and the backplate of the Formula but if the Code is better at cooling VRM, I'll take it. This is my priority over how the boards look.
> Though, if the temps difference is under 5°C or so, I may take Formula


Historically the Formula cools very well even without water


----------



## Menthol

I don't see a VRM temperature reading in software on my Hero, I don't know winch if any Z370 boards will have a VRM sensor reading to even know if temps are an issue. I am confident in ASUS's Maximus boards


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I don't think you have to worry about VRM, case airflow should be enough
> 
> Where is all the posts? There must be more people with Z370
> 
> My Hero Wifi is running fantastic at 5.0/[email protected], 3600 15 16 16 32 1T, Aura has a few issues with FCU, that's about it for initial issues so I just have them turned off, when it wakes from sleep mode Aura settings have changed
> 
> Still waiting for an Apex to bench


I'm seeing the same issue with Aura on the APEX. Lighting config gets lost.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I don't see a VRM temperature reading in software on my Hero, I don't know winch if any Z370 boards will have a VRM sensor reading to even know if temps are an issue. I am confident in ASUS's Maximus boards


The Apex reports a VRM temperature to AID64 (etc). This has never gone above high 40s even with some high clock/voltage encoding stress testing.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I don't see a VRM temperature reading in software on my Hero, I don't know winch if any Z370 boards will have a VRM sensor reading to even know if temps are an issue. I am confident in ASUS's Maximus boards


The Hero's and Apex's VRM temp can be viewed in HWInfo under the Asus EC section.


----------



## Menthol

The Wifi model doesn't show the VRM temps that I can see and the vcore reading in CPU is half of real voltage, little quirks


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> The Wifi model doesn't show the VRM temps that I can see and the vcore reading in CPU is half of real voltage, little quirks


Oh ok I have the non wifi Hero X and it shows VRM under Asus EC in Hwinfo, same as my Apex does as well. It displays vcore correctly in CPU-Z as well.

I did read on the ROG forums that the Wifi Hero X was having issue with vcore readings and other things, that weren't present in the non wifi version, but I don't know if they have fixed them yet with a bios update.

I don't know what bios version you are on, but 0505 is the latest one if you aren't already on it.


----------



## tiefox

Finally got mine today....was the missing piece!



Anyone knows if it can do bootable m.2 raid 0 ?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tiefox*
> 
> Finally got mine today....was the missing piece!
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone knows if it can do bootable m.2 raid 0 ?


Yes it can


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Just the board I'm waiting for.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Just the board I'm waiting for.


I think you are really gonna like the 8700K. Incredible 6-core processor.


----------



## chibi

Dang, when is Canada getting the Apex


----------



## reset1101

Hi,

Is there any BIOS available for the Maximus X Hero other than the 0505 release BIOS? Cant boot the system if I set the RAM to its XMP Profile. RAM kit is this one:

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c17d-32gtzr

At Auto speeds (2133Mhz) works just fine. So I guess its a problem that may need to be solved. Also, board is behaving kind of funny when it comes to voltages applied to the CPU (8700k). Thing is, Ive read these problems on the Strix Z370-e and F boards happening as well, but being fixed with new BIOS updates. Which there are several available to those boards, as well as new chipset drivers for example.

But the Hero is kind of forgotten. Any ideas on when new BIOS / drivers will be available for this board?

Thanks a lot for your help


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Is there any BIOS available for the Maximus X Hero other than the 0505 release BIOS? Cant boot the system if I set the RAM to its XMP Profile. RAM kit is this one:
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c17d-32gtzr
> 
> At Auto speeds (2133Mhz) works just fine. So I guess its a problem that may need to be solved. Also, board is behaving kind of funny when it comes to voltages applied to the CPU (8700k). Thing is, Ive read these problems on the Strix Z370-e and F boards happening as well, but being fixed with new BIOS updates. Which there are several available to those boards, as well as new chipset drivers for example.
> 
> But the Hero is kind of forgotten. Any ideas on when new BIOS / drivers will be available for this board?
> 
> Thanks a lot for your help


did you do a clr cmos, post and then Choose XMP from the drop-down list in AI Tuner?


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> did you do a clr cmos, post and then Choose XMP from the drop-down list in AI Tuner?


Thanks for your answer. Yes I did, and results were the same. After saving changes and exiting BIOS, when starting post it would get stuck on the RAM error code. Had to press mem-ok button to be able to get back to BIOS and set it back to Auto.


----------



## tiefox

Ok, got my Apex, unfortunately it does not boot with my XMP profile for 2x8gb Gskill 4266 cas 19 rgb kit with everything else on default, I know It was not in the QVL but I had bought the kit in a trip to the US 2 months ago, so there was some hope. Best I could get was 3733mhz CAS 15 with the cpu at 5.1ghz with a vcore of 1.38. Hitting 91 degrees on a old corsair h110 aio. Will delid and go full custom waterloop, I think I can reach 5.2 on the CPU but dont see my memory improving.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> Thanks for your answer. Yes I did, and results were the same. After saving changes and exiting BIOS, when starting post it would get stuck on the RAM error code. Had to press mem-ok button to be able to get back to BIOS and set it back to Auto.


okay - do a clr cmos, post to bios and enable the XMP, MANUALLY set the VSA to 1.25V and VCCIO to 1.25V. F10 ... wil lit post? And if it does not, what Q-code does it halt the POST process at?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tiefox*
> 
> Ok, got my Apex, unfortunately it does not boot with my XMP profile for 2x8gb Gskill 4266 cas 19 rgb kit with everything else on default, I know It was not in the QVL but I had bought the kit in a trip to the US 2 months ago, so there was some hope. Best I could get was 3733mhz CAS 15 with the cpu at 5.1ghz with a vcore of 1.38. Hitting 91 degrees on a old corsair h110 aio. Will delid and go full custom waterloop, I think I can reach 5.2 on the CPU but dont see my memory improving.


I would suggest both you guys should enter the ram timings manually. In the memory menu, select the Preset that is closest to the voltage you are willing to run at (like 1.4V) then after loading the preset, back out and set the primary timings, frequency and voltage manually. If you had loaded XMPO prior, be sure to clear cmos to flush ALL of the XMP settings - some of which you may not, or cannot return to default via hte keyboard.


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> okay - do a clr cmos, post to bios and enable the XMP, MANUALLY set the VSA to 1.25V and VCCIO to 1.25V. F10 ... wil lit post? And if it does not, what Q-code does it halt the POST process at?


Can you please confirm where in the BIOS are those options? I mean, I see VCCIO near the CPU Voltage. But if I set there 1.25v as you suggest, it gets purple colour, as if the value was too high. In fact, I have it now at 0.97v. By VSA you mean System Agent Voltaje? I cant find VSA anywhere. And if I set it to 1.25v, it goes purple too.

Anyway, in my very short knowledge compared to yours about Asus motherboards, but with the experience Ive had with computers and Asus boards for years, this MB needs a BIOS update ASAP with fixes for this and other problems. I appreciate your help a lot, but I dont think we should be fiddling with BIOS values, as XMP should work just by enabling it. Just like in the Maximus VIII Hero I had until last week

Edit: couple questions:

- Are you an Asus employee by any chance, or just someone trying to help? Thanks anyway








- Could I try drivers and BIOS from other Z370 MB like the Z370-E and F in the Hero? Or they are different between boards and I could have trouble if I do?


----------



## tiefox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> okay - do a clr cmos, post to bios and enable the XMP, MANUALLY set the VSA to 1.25V and VCCIO to 1.25V. F10 ... wil lit post? And if it does not, what Q-code does it halt the POST process at?
> I would suggest both you guys should enter the ram timings manually. In the memory menu, select the Preset that is closest to the voltage you are willing to run at (like 1.4V) then after loading the preset, back out and set the primary timings, frequency and voltage manually. If you had loaded XMPO prior, be sure to clear cmos to flush ALL of the XMP settings - some of which you may not, or cannot return to default via hte keyboard.


Just tried that and no go. Getting code 55 all the time.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> Can you please confirm where in the BIOS are those options? I mean, I see VCCIO near the CPU Voltage. But if I set there 1.25v as you suggest, it gets purple colour, as if the value was too high. In fact, I have it now at 0.97v. By VSA you mean System Agent Voltaje? I cant find VSA anywhere. And if I set it to 1.25v, it goes purple too.
> 
> Anyway, in my very short knowledge compared to yours about Asus motherboards, but with the experience Ive had with computers and Asus boards for years, this MB needs a BIOS update ASAP with fixes for this and other problems. I appreciate your help a lot, but I dont think we should be fiddling with BIOS values, as XMP should work just by enabling it. Just like in the Maximus VIII Hero I had until last week
> 
> Edit: couple questions:
> 
> - Are you an Asus employee by any chance, or just someone trying to help? Thanks anyway
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - Could I try drivers and BIOS from other Z370 MB like the Z370-E and F in the Hero? Or they are different between boards and I could have trouble if I do?


i'm not an Asus employee. Just trying to help.
But I have to say.. you are on Overclock.net... changing bios settings is what this is all about. 1.2-1.25V VCCIO and VSA (yes, system agent) on Z370 is fine. My 8700K is running as shown below.
Honestly, I would not rely upon XMP to work AND be thoroughly stable on any platform. Besides, leaving th4ese voltage on Auto with XMP and your ram kit wil llikely run much higher voltage, I was trying to tame that for you.
Anywho... your wait for a bios fix to address your specific problem begins.
Probably best to fill out the bug report as shown in th eOP of this thread.

Lastly, you say you are concerned about running a "purple" voltage on an overclock (and ram that high is also a CPU overclock) .. but ask about cross flashing bioses from different boards? Really?



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tiefox*
> 
> Just tried that and no go. Getting code 55 all the time.


Okay - code 55 is dram (basically usually solved by increasing VSa further). My 4400c19 kit requires 1.275V VSA just to run 4266c17 stable. You can check this thread for ram help:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread/5120_20#post_26429983


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> i'm not an Asus employee. Just trying to help.
> But I have to say.. you are on Overclock.net... changing bios settings is what this is all about. 1.2-1.25V VCCIO and VSA (yes, system agent) on Z370 is fine. My 8700K is running as shown below.
> Honestly, I would not rely upon XMP to work AND be thoroughly stable on any platform. Besides, leaving th4ese voltage on Auto with XMP and your ram kit wil llikely run much higher voltage, I was trying to tame that for you.
> Anywho... your wait for a bios fix to address your specific problem begins.
> Probably best to fill out the bug report as shown in th eOP of this thread.
> 
> Lastly, you say you are concerned about running a "purple" voltage on an overclock (and ram that high is also a CPU overclock) .. but ask about cross flashing bioses from different boards? Really?


Thanks again for your help. I have changed lots of BIOS settings trying to fix voltage issues for example. Is not that I dont want to. Its just that with an older Asus MB I didnt need to, for this particular RAM kit. Besides that, it seems tiefox is having the same problem as me, has tried your suggestion and hasnt worked for him. Not saying it in a negative way, its just that with other Asus Z2370 mobos, other people couldnt fix this until BIOS were updated











And my concerns might sound weird to you, but thats why I ask. Whether it migh be a small thing, or something that could brick my board. If m not sure about what Im going to do, or I dont have the knowledge, I prefer to ask







.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Is there any BIOS available for the Maximus X Hero other than the 0505 release BIOS? Cant boot the system if I set the RAM to its XMP Profile. RAM kit is this one:
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c17d-32gtzr
> 
> At Auto speeds (2133Mhz) works just fine. So I guess its a problem that may need to be solved. Also, board is behaving kind of funny when it comes to voltages applied to the CPU (8700k). Thing is, Ive read these problems on the Strix Z370-e and F boards happening as well, but being fixed with new BIOS updates. Which there are several available to those boards, as well as new chipset drivers for example.
> 
> But the Hero is kind of forgotten. Any ideas on when new BIOS / drivers will be available for this board?
> 
> Thanks a lot for your help


After turning on XMP, go into the Dram Timings Menu and change your primary timings to 17-18-18-38, save and reboot and it should then boot up fine.

I have found that sometimes not all XMP primary timings combinations are supported automatically in the bios, especially in a newly released board like the Hero and changing them to a more commonly used combination, then works in the board training up and booting successfully.

Give that a try and see if it works.


----------



## Menthol

My X Hero Wifi does not set high VCCIO and VCCSA voltages on auto like my Z270 did, for 3600cl16 32GB kit, I set XMP and manual VCCIO, VCCSA (System Agent) to 1.2 and 1.22 volts in bios, AIDA shows 1.216 and 1.232 and I have a few timings tightened a little 15-16-16-32-1T, if I just set XMP it also will not boot, bios 0505


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> After turning on XMP, go into the Dram Timings Menu and change your primary timings to 17-18-18-38, save and reboot and it should then boot up fine.
> 
> I have found that sometimes not all XMP primary timings combinations are supported automatically in the bios, especially in a newly released board like the Hero and changing them to a more commonly used combination, then works in the board training up and booting successfully.
> 
> Give that a try and see if it works.


Thanks for the suggestion but just tried it and wont boot, code error 49


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> Thanks for the suggestion but just tried it and wont boot, code error 49


49 is dram training fail. this can be due to weak sticks, weak cpu IMC... poor RTLs, or insufficient voltage on the core, cache, dram vccio or vsa rails. I've gotten many 49 (and 55) on a number of boards, one of these always fixes it.
And again - XMP may not work depending on the cpu.
Good chance a different board's bios would not cross flash.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> My X Hero Wifi does not set high VCCIO and VCCSA voltages on auto like my Z270 did, for 3600cl16 32GB kit, I set XMP and manual VCCIO, VCCSA (System Agent) to 1.2 and 1.22 volts in bios, AIDA shows 1.216 and 1.232 and I have a few timings tightened a little 15-16-16-32-1T, if I just set XMP it also will not boot, bios 0505


yeah, good to know it's not running a high voltgae - but you still set a manual VCCIO and VSA. I have some ram kits here that fail XMP, but this new 4400c19 kit boots it's XMP right up. go figure.


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 49 is dram training fail. this can be due to weak sticks, weak cpu IMC... poor RTLs, or insufficient voltage on the core, cache, dram vccio or vsa rails. I've gotten many 49 (and 55) on a number of boards, one of these always fixes it.
> And again - XMP may not work depending on the cpu.
> Good chance a different board's bios would not cross flash.


Tried setting VCCIO and VCCSA to 1.25v and same 49 error. But setting manually the speed to 3200Mhz and DRAM Voltage to 1.35v, with the rest in auto (timmings are 17-18-18-36), boots and seems to work fine so far.

Edit: have been fiddling some more; seems that memories are fine at 3466 as well. They just dont boot at 3600. But thats more like it. Can live without those 144Mhz until BIOS get refined.


----------



## sdch

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdch*
> 
> I'm moving from 7700K/Z270I to 8700K/Z370I and noticed a few quirks:
> 
> 1. If you set AVX offset to some value (e.g. -3), when you set it back to 0 the value doesn't actually change. You can verify this by stress testing with any AVX program and watching the multipliers drop. The only way to actually go back to 0 AVX offset is "Load Optimized Defaults" -> "Save and Exit" then go back into the bios and load your settings again.


This is still broken in 0430. In fact, it's so broken you have to reflash the BIOS to undo the setting. Nice.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> Thanks for the suggestion but just tried it and wont boot, code error 49


Increase your Dram voltage to 1.40 volts and it should boot up at 3600mhz 17-18-18-38


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Increase your Dram voltage to 1.40 volts and it should boot up at 3600mhz 17-18-18-38


Since I wrote that, Ive had to reboot the system several times to do different tests with case fans, and now system wont boot at 3466. Just the first time. So Ive left memories at 3200Mhz. Will fiddle more with them, when more stable BIOS are released.


----------



## Jpmboy

some error codes:


----------



## [email protected]

New beta builds with revised rules for SVID behaviour and LLC (similar to the 0430 build for the Strix Z370-E):

Maximus X Hero Wifi UEFI build 0802

Maximus X Hero UEFI build 0802

Maximus X Apex UEFI build 0802

Maximus X Code UEFI build 0802

Maximus X Formula UEFI build 0802

TUF Z370 Pro Gaming UEFI build 0802

Other boards will get the same updates in due time.


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> New beta builds with revised rules for SVID behaviour and LLC (similar to the 0430 build for the Strix Z370-E):
> 
> Maximus X Hero Wifi UEFI build 0802
> 
> Maximus X Hero UEFI build 0802
> 
> Maximus X Apex UEFI build 0802
> 
> Maximus X Code UEFI build 0802
> 
> Maximus X Formula UEFI build 0802
> 
> TUF Z370 Pro Gaming UEFI build 0802
> 
> Other boards will get the same updates in due time.


Thanks a lot! Going to try it in my Hero X right away and post impresions.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> New beta builds with revised rules for SVID behaviour and LLC (similar to the 0430 build for the Strix Z370-E):
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Maximus X Hero Wifi UEFI build 0802
> 
> Maximus X Hero UEFI build 0802
> 
> Maximus X Apex UEFI build 0802
> 
> Maximus X Code UEFI build 0802
> 
> Maximus X Formula UEFI build 0802
> 
> TUF Z370 Pro Gaming UEFI build 0802
> 
> 
> 
> Other boards will get the same updates in due time.


Added to the OP, thanks.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> New beta builds with revised rules for SVID behaviour and LLC (similar to the 0430 build for the Strix Z370-E):
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Maximus X Hero Wifi UEFI build 0802
> 
> Maximus X Hero UEFI build 0802
> 
> Maximus X Apex UEFI build 0802
> 
> Maximus X Code UEFI build 0802
> 
> Maximus X Formula UEFI build 0802
> 
> TUF Z370 Pro Gaming UEFI build 0802
> 
> 
> Other boards will get the same updates in due time.


Thanks. Any news about when the Formula/Code hit the shelves ?


----------



## Praz

There have been numerous posts regarding incorrect VCORE compared to the voltage set in the BIOS. After some testing part of this can be attributed to incorrect BIOS settings or not taking into account Intel's programming of the VID tables.

All the screenshots below were taken with the same BIOS settings. All testing was done one after the other with no reboots in-between the tests. Software used was Prime95, HWBOT x265 Benchmark, CPU-Z and HWINFO. The DMM is connected at the CPU socket to eliminate PCB trace induced errors. The related BIOS settings are as follows:

CPU Multiplier - Sync Cores, 47 Multiplier
Cache Multipliers - Auto
AVX Offset - 0
CPU Voltage - Adaptive set at 1.27V
LLC - Level 5
IO AC/DC - 0.01
SVID - Enabled
SVID Behavoir - Best Case

Prime95 Small FFTs FMA disabled, AVX enabled. Actual voltage under load 1.248V. VDROOP - 0.022V



Prime95 Small FFTs FMA3/AVX enabled. Actual voltage under load 1.246V. VDROOP - 0.024V



Prime95 Small FFTs FMA3/AVX disabled. Actual voltage under load 1.216V. Appearant VDROOP - 0.054V



HWBOT x265 Benchmark. Actual voltage under load 1.265V. VDROOP - 0.005V



As can be seen in the above screenshots reporting software is not accurate and should be used as a general reference only. With that in mind CPU Package Power can still be used for comparison as the actual measured current differences were similar. It's known that Prime95 Small FFTs utilizing any of the AVX instruction sets places a higher load on the CPU compared to the same run without using AVX. This is evident when looking at the reported power shown in HWINFO. The amount of VDROOP also increases as the amount of load increases. With these facts in hand it is obvious that the 0.054V difference in VCORE compared to what is set when running non-AVX Prime95 cannot be the result of VDROOP alone. It seems that when SVID communication is enabled the set VCORE applies to AVX enabled workloads and for non-AVX the voltage is substantially reduced. What appears to be excessive VDROOP is actually a difference of base voltage depending on the workload.

When moving away from synthetic testing and using tools that mimic actual programs VDROOP improves significantly as can be seen with the HWBOT x265 Benchmark. Even though AVX is used there is virtually no VDROOP when the system is set up properly. VDROOP can be further improved but consequences such as overshoot come into play. If relying on software reporting or limited in the tools available for proper testing 0.020V - 0.030V seems to be an acceptable VDROOP value for AVX enabled Prime95. Also depending on settings and the board venturing above 1.28V VCORE may result in voltage extremes not seen by software or DMMs.


----------



## reset1101

First impressions of the 0802 BIOS. After flashing, all the values were set to default, so nothing from the old BIOS config that could affect the results:

- First thing I tried was setting the XMP profile, to see if it would boot. A couple of times it got into a loop trying to post, showing b1 error all the time. But in the end, it ended up posting. After that, it wouldnt post at all. But now, with the XMP profile active and the speed manually set to 3500Mhz, it boots every time I try and seems perfectly stable. So, not quite perfect yet, but we are getting there.

Another thing that caught my attention were the VCCIO and VCCSA values, now set to 1.33 and 1.32 in Auto (and nothing has broken or caught fire, so apologies Jpmboy). That resulted in a few degrees more in temps. Thing is, Ive tried to slowly lower those values, and right now I have them both at 1.05 (havent tried less as Im happy with those values). PC boots and works just fine. So, I dont know why the MB was setting almost 0.3v higher than needed. And if RAM needs it, why its working with much less. I dont have them at 3600 tho.

- Also, in the Maximus X Hero at least, the SVID behaviour option is available; before it wasnt.

- I havent fiddled much with LLC. As I use manual voltage control. So cant say if its accurate, it has vdroops or what.

My CPU still has higher temps than others, but I think Ive lost the silicon lottery. Or the paste used between the DIE and IHS in my CPU was some dry mucus they had stuck under a table.

Also, I think this boards still need more polishing. And Asus should try to update them quicker. But overall, Im happy that thins are getting fixed or improved


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> First impressions of the 0802 BIOS. After flashing, all the values were set to default, so nothing from the old BIOS config that could affect the results:
> 
> - First thing I tried was setting the XMP profile, to see if it would boot. A couple of times it got into a loop trying to post, showing b1 error all the time. But in the end, it ended up posting. After that, it wouldnt post at all. But now, with the XMP profile active and the speed manually set to 3500Mhz, it boots every time I try and seems perfectly stable. So, not quite perfect yet, but we are getting there.
> 
> Another thing that caught my attention were the VCCIO and VCCSA values, now set to 1.33 and 1.32 in Auto (and nothing has broken or caught fire, so apologies Jpmboy). That resulted in a few degrees more in temps. Thing is, Ive tried to slowly lower those values, and right now I have them both at 1.05 (havent tried less as Im happy with those values). PC boots and works just fine. So, I dont know why the MB was setting almost 0.3v higher than needed. And if RAM needs it, why its working with much less. I dont have them at 3600 tho.
> 
> - Also, in the Maximus X Hero at least, the SVID behaviour option is available; before it wasnt.
> 
> - I havent fiddled much with LLC. As I use manual voltage control. So cant say if its accurate, it has vdroops or what.
> 
> My CPU still has higher temps than others, but I think Ive lost the silicon lottery. Or the paste used between the DIE and IHS in my CPU was some dry mucus they had stuck under a table.
> 
> Also, I think this boards still need more polishing. And Asus should try to update them quicker. But overall, Im happy that thins are getting fixed or improved


SVID Behaviour was available in Bios 0505 on the Maximus X Hero, that was the first time it appeared as a new option.

Run some memory stability tests on your modules and you will find that what you have set your vccio and sa voltages at, will be too low under load at 3500/3600mhz and you will get errors or Windows will blue screen. Booting into Windows is not a measure of stability.

The OP in the following thread shows how to properly test your memory for true stability.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread


----------



## chibi

Those of you waiting on an Apex are in luck! BH Photo is now shipping them









Me personally will wait until the Canadian vendors start stocking them as there's a hefty customs fee !

Edit - my will is weak, ordered placed for expedited delivery this Thursday!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> There have been numerous posts regarding incorrect VCORE compared to the voltage set in the BIOS. After some testing part of this can be attributed to incorrect BIOS settings or not taking into account Intel's programming of the VID tables.
> 
> All the screenshots below were taken with the same BIOS settings. All testing was done one after the other with no reboots in-between the tests. Software used was Prime95, HWBOT x265 Benchmark, CPU-Z and HWINFO. The DMM is connected at the CPU socket to eliminate PCB trace induced errors. The related BIOS settings are as follows:
> 
> CPU Multiplier - Sync Cores, 47 Multiplier
> Cache Multipliers - Auto
> AVX Offset - 0
> CPU Voltage - Adaptive set at 1.27V
> LLC - Level 5
> IO AC/DC - 0.01
> SVID - Enabled
> SVID Behavoir - Best Case
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Prime95 Small FFTs FMA disabled, AVX enabled. Actual voltage under load 1.248V. VDROOP - 0.022V
> 
> 
> 
> Prime95 Small FFTs FMA3/AVX enabled. Actual voltage under load 1.246V. VDROOP - 0.024V
> 
> 
> 
> Prime95 Small FFTs FMA3/AVX disabled. Actual voltage under load 1.216V. Appearant VDROOP - 0.054V
> 
> 
> 
> HWBOT x265 Benchmark. Actual voltage under load 1.265V. VDROOP - 0.005V
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As can be seen in the above screenshots reporting software is not accurate and should be used as a general reference only. With that in mind CPU Package Power can still be used for comparison as the actual measured current differences were similar. It's known that Prime95 Small FFTs utilizing any of the AVX instruction sets places a higher load on the CPU compared to the same run without using AVX. This is evident when looking at the reported power shown in HWINFO. The amount of VDROOP also increases as the amount of load increases. With these facts in hand it is obvious that the 0.054V difference in VCORE compared to what is set when running non-AVX Prime95 cannot be the result of VDROOP alone. It seems that when SVID communication is enabled the set VCORE applies to AVX enabled workloads and for non-AVX the voltage is substantially reduced. What appears to be excessive VDROOP is actually a difference of base voltage depending on the workload.
> 
> When moving away from synthetic testing and using tools that mimic actual programs VDROOP improves significantly as can be seen with the HWBOT x265 Benchmark. Even though AVX is used there is virtually no VDROOP when the system is set up properly. VDROOP can be further improved but consequences such as overshoot come into play. If relying on software reporting or limited in the tools available for proper testing 0.020V - 0.030V seems to be an acceptable VDROOP value for AVX enabled Prime95. Also depending on settings and the board venturing above 1.28V VCORE may result in voltage extremes not seen by software or DMMs.


Nice! Thanks. which bios?


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Nice! Thanks. which bios?


Hello

BIOS version 0430 Z370-A


----------



## sdch

Motherboard: Z370-I
BIOS Version: 0430

When you shut down and unplug the system, it loses the RGB lighting setting (off becomes on). When you plug the system back in the RGB lights immediately turn on even though the system remains off. After powering up the system, the lights remain on until you enter the BIOS, then save and exit (no changes are made).

One more: "Ring Down Bin" defaults to disabled which is the opposite of what the description text says.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdch*
> 
> Motherboard: Z370-I
> BIOS Version: 0430
> 
> When you shut down and unplug the system, it loses the RGB lighting setting (off becomes on). When you plug the system back in the RGB lights immediately turn on even though the system remains off. After powering up the system, the lights remain on until you enter the BIOS, then save and exit (no changes are made).
> 
> One more: "Ring Down Bin" defaults to disabled which is the opposite of what the description text says.


It should be Auto as the Default - right?


----------



## sdch

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> It should be Auto as the Default - right?


Auto is the default setting and the default behavior of it is "disabled". However, the description text says the default behavior of Auto should be "enabled". Clear as mud, I know.


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Run some memory stability tests on your modules and you will find that what you have set your vccio and sa voltages at, will be too low under load at 3500/3600mhz and you will get errors or Windows will blue screen. Booting into Windows is not a measure of stability.
> 
> The OP in the following thread shows how to properly test your memory for true stability.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread


Thanks for your suggestion. I wasnt explaning myself properly. I ment that the PC wouldnt even post. I agree that booting into Windows isnt a measure of stability. Yesterday I left my PC with CPU and GPU at 100%, with distributed computing an mining, for 9 hours straight and no stability issues. I might use the test you suggest, but so far no stability issues even with good stress for the PC.


----------



## Essenbe

Is there any news about when the Formula will be released?


----------



## Spiriva

Bought my self a Maximus Hero X and a 8700k, got it running at 5200mhz.
Got it delidded and at this volt it doesnt get hotter then ~75c - 77c while stressing it and while gaming around 40-50c.

Also got the memory running at 3700mhz at 1.450v (up from 3200mhz)
So far it runs really smooth and im very happy with the system.

*Ek watercooled with mono block


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Spiriva*
> 
> Bought my self a Maximus Hero X and a 8700k, got it running at 5200mhz.
> Got it delidded and at this volt it doesnt get hotter then ~75c - 77c while stressing it and while gaming around 40-50c.
> 
> Also got the memory running at 3700mhz at 1.450v (up from 3200mhz)
> So far it runs really smooth and im very happy with the system.
> 
> *Ek watercooled with mono block


nice! I'm really liking this 8700K. Very "snappy".


----------



## titter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Is there any BIOS available for the Maximus X Hero other than the 0505 release BIOS? Cant boot the system if I set the RAM to its XMP Profile. RAM kit is this one:
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c17d-32gtzr
> 
> At Auto speeds (2133Mhz) works just fine. So I guess its a problem that may need to be solved. Also, board is behaving kind of funny when it comes to voltages applied to the CPU (8700k). Thing is, Ive read these problems on the Strix Z370-e and F boards happening as well, but being fixed with new BIOS updates. Which there are several available to those boards, as well as new chipset drivers for example.
> 
> But the Hero is kind of forgotten. Any ideas on when new BIOS / drivers will be available for this board?
> 
> Thanks a lot for your help


I have the same board and memory (kicking myself for not checking the QVL, but I wanted to get this build done). I can load the XMP, and run this memory at 3600 without issues at 1.35 volts and 1.2 SA/1.175 IO. This was on BIOS 0505. Anything past 3600 won't post. I am going to start messing with the timings, just haven't had time.

Need to do a full post of the new build, but it has a Hero X, 8700k, 32GB TridentZ, Strix GTX 1080TI, 1TB Samsung NVME, Corsair HX1000i - all ekwb blocks, fittings, and rads. Singularity Computers res, pump top, and mounting. I did the custom sleeving, and wiring myself:


----------



## [email protected]

Same patches as previous 0802 and 0430 test builds for other boards:

TUF Z370 Pro Gaming UEFI build 0802

TUF Z370 Plus Gaming UEFI build 0430 test 018

ROG Strix Z370 G Gaming UEFI build 0430 test 018

ROG Strix Z370 F Gaming UEFI build 0430 test 018


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ Linked in the OP


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *titter*
> 
> I have the same board and memory (kicking myself for not checking the QVL, but I wanted to get this build done). I can load the XMP, and run this memory at 3600 without issues at 1.35 volts and 1.2 SA/1.175 IO. This was on BIOS 0505. Anything past 3600 won't post. I am going to start messing with the timings, just haven't had time.
> 
> Need to do a full post of the new build, but it has a Hero X, 8700k, 32GB TridentZ, Strix GTX 1080TI, 1TB Samsung NVME, Corsair HX1000i - all ekwb blocks, fittings, and rads. Singularity Computers res, pump top, and mounting. I did the custom sleeving, and wiring myself:


Man your build is sexy! Congrats!


----------



## bern43

Can anyone with an Apex comment on the clearance between the top gpu slot and the ram slots? I've got an Apex on pre-order and am worried that the Aquacomputer backplate won't clear the ram slots. Aquacomputer actually slimmed down their back plate to about 2 mm, so it's not super thick. In the past I've had to either trim the ram dimm clips or grind the backplate.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bern43*
> 
> Can anyone with an Apex comment on the clearance between the top gpu slot and the ram slots? I've got an Apex on pre-order and am worried that the Aquacomputer backplate won't clear the ram slots. Aquacomputer actually slimmed down their back plate to about 2 mm, so it's not super thick. In the past I've had to either trim the ram dimm clips or grind the backplate.


my GS tridents are 12mm from the GPU backplate on my set up. The only issue may be the fan header back by the IO panel if the AQ plate is really sticking out. Much more room between the Ram slots and PCIE 1 on this generation board.


----------



## reset1101

Id like to report another weird thing that has happened to me several times. And to know if anyone else has had the same issue. Right now, I have all the cores at 4,5Ghz with manual voltage of 1.1v. Pretty simple setup. So, all cores should be at 4,5Ghz all the time, if Im not mistaken. But sometimes, the speed of the cores vary between 4,1 and 4,5Ghz. With temps 4-5º higher than normal. I have a distributed computing program running all the time, so lack of load for the CPU isnt an issue. And the energy mode in Windows is high performance.

It has happened today for example. Then Ive rebooted the PC and without changing anything in the BIOS or anywhere else, CPU has worked as its supposed to again, with 4,5Ghz in all cores and the usual temps.

The program Ive used to monitor that is HWiNFO64 BTW.


----------



## Jpmboy

does the discomp application use AVX/FMA, AVX2?


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> does the discomp application use AVX/FMA, AVX2?


I use BOINC client with stock settings and no addons installed. Have done a bit of research on Google but cant tell for sure if it does or doesnt.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> I use BOINC client with stock settings and no addons installed. Have done a bit of research on Google but cant tell for sure if it does or doesnt.


Bionic likely does (even [email protected] does) depending on the WU. It may be the AVX down-bin you are seeing. Set the AVX offset to 0, cpui current to 140%.. and there are other core limits after these.


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Bionic likely does (even [email protected] does) depending on the WU. It may be the AVX down-bin you are seeing. Set the AVX offset to 0, cpui current to 140%.. and there are other core limits after these.


Thanks for the advice. AVX offsert is set to 0 already. Thing is, my PC does this once in a while. Not always. Thats the weird thing. Will check what youve suggested anyway


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> Thanks for the advice. AVX offsert is set to 0 already. Thing is, my PC does this once in a while. Not always. Thats the weird thing. Will check what youve suggested anyway


have a look at these bios SS.

171116211255.zip 1345k .zip file


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> have a look at these bios SS.
> 
> 171116211255.zip 1345k .zip file


Million thanks







I see they are settings for a 5.2Ghz OC. For 4,5ghz, aside from the cpu voltage and RAM parameters, are the rest settings valid for me, or there is any other I should not copy?


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah, ignore the clocks and voltages, use the power section settings and see if the throttling stops. remember, bionic will not always push a call for full turbo mode. leave PLL bandwidth and Eventual dram voltage on Auto. The ram settings are not something you need for this question.


----------



## reset1101

Ive seen that 0802 BIOS is available now in Asus support page to download. Is it the same that was posted in this thread, or a newer revised revision? Thanks.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> Ive seen that 0802 BIOS is available now in Asus support page to download. Is it the same that was posted in this thread, or a newer revised revision? Thanks.


Same number = same build.


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Same number = same build.


Thanks


----------



## OCmember

Excited about possibly putting together a new platform. Thinking about the Apex + 8700K, and a ram kit for a gaming rig.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Excited about possibly putting together a new platform. Thinking about the Apex + 8700K, and a ram kit for a gaming rig.


Can't beat that combination


----------



## chibi

What's your guys thoughts on disabling the "ring down bin" in bios? The notion of overvolting the cpu is scary, but I'd like to see some higher cache clocks.

Right now on bios 0802, a setting of 47 cache multiplier will down clock to 4400 when left on auto.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> What's your guys thoughts on disabling the "ring down bin" in bios? The notion of overvolting the cpu is scary, but I'd like to see some higher cache clocks.
> 
> Right now on bios 0802, a setting of 47 cache multiplier will down clock to 4400 when left on auto.


i think you are confusing ring ("interconnects") with cache?
this is a good read (SKL-X focus) https://www.anandtech.com/show/11839/intel-core-i9-7980xe-and-core-i9-7960x-review/2


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> i think you are confusing ring ("interconnects") with cache?
> this is a good read (SKL-X focus) https://www.anandtech.com/show/11839/intel-core-i9-7980xe-and-core-i9-7960x-review/2


Hey Jp, I was referring the to "Ring Down Bin" setting in the pic below. The description says disabling this parameter may cause overvolting to the CPU. When left in the Auto state, it downclocks the cache. When I tested with a Max CPU Cache multiplier of 47, the Cache downclocks to 4400MHz under stress testing.



Side note - it seems I have a high vid 8700k. Default at CPU Core 4700MHz has the vid sitting around 1.29V. No point setting adaptive voltage under that value it seems.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Hey Jp, I was referring the to "Ring Down Bin" setting in the pic below. The description says disabling this parameter may cause overvolting to the CPU. When left in the Auto state, it downclocks the cache. When I tested with a Max CPU Cache multiplier of 47, the Cache downclocks to 4400MHz under stress testing.
> 
> 
> 
> Side note - it seems I have a high vid 8700k. Default at CPU Core 4700MHz has the vid sitting around 1.29V. No point setting adaptive voltage under that value it seems.


yeah - that's what I'm talking about. cache and ring are not the same. I'm not getting the drop in cahce freq under load. what stress test are you referring to?
Before messing with ring, disable speedstep and speed shift, and see if the cache still down clocks.


----------



## chibi

That's odd, I just restarted to bios, flipped the cache max multi to 47 and loaded back into windows. Set power plan to high and it maxes out the cache at 4400. Ran aida mem bench and it stays at 4400. Went to bios again and disabled ring down bin and it put the cache clocks to 4700 mhz now.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

min and max cache ratios to the desired speed instead of auto.


----------



## chibi

Thanks MrTS, in previous gens, I've always left the min cache on Auto so it can downclock in idle state. I'll restart and try the speedstep/shift Jp mentioned.

Edit - disabling the speedstep/shift did not get me the max cache multiplier. Only works when I disable the ring down bin


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Thanks MrTS, in previous gens, I've always left the min cache on Auto so it can downclock in idle state. I'll restart and try the speedstep/shift Jp mentioned.
> 
> Edit - disabling the speedstep/shift did not get me the max cache multiplier. Only works when I disable the ring down bin


that's strange. what bios?








did you try MrT's suggestion?
these settings for 52/48 run at the cache set in bios v0703 (1080 folding during the screen shot - not the cpu)

171118134201.zip 2007k .zip file


----------



## chibi

Hi Jp, other than PLL Bandwidth, my bios isn't too far off from yours in terms of power settings. I'm on BIOS 0802 right now and setting min + max cache to 47 does get me to 4700mhz in windows. However, the down side is only my cpu downclocks in idle states while the cache is going full speed.

I've confirmed again that the only way to get max cache is to set ring down bin to disabled









At this point, I'm going to back off the cpu/cache overclock and wait until my watercooling gear arrives. Will continue to tune memory


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Hi Jp, other than PLL Bandwidth, my bios isn't too far off from yours in terms of power settings. I'm on BIOS 0802 right now and setting min + max cache to 47 does get me to 4700mhz in windows. However, the down side is only my cpu downclocks in idle states while the cache is going full speed.
> 
> I've confirmed again that the only way to get max cache is to set ring down bin to disabled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At this point, I'm going to back off the cpu/cache overclock and wait until my watercooling gear arrives. Will continue to tune memory


can you post a bios screen shot pack? 'Cause either the bios is corrupted some how, or some setting is off somewhere. If not screenshots, use the ctrl-F2 function to drop a txt file to a USB stick (in any port). Scroll to the stick in the ASUS profiles Menu.








looks like this (x299 rig):

46bycore_setting.txt 68k .txt file


----------



## chibi

No problems @Jpmboy, please see attached and let me know if something looks funky.

3866Config.zip 2669k .zip file





Spoiler: BIOS Screenshots


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> No problems @Jpmboy, please see attached and let me know if something looks funky.
> 
> 3866Config.zip 2669k .zip file
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: BIOS Screenshots


I don't see anything funky in the screenshots (spoiler). THat is basically how I have mine set up and it holds the set cache multiplier under load. What exact load or stress test is causing the drop in cache clock?


----------



## chibi

I've only set the multiplier to 47, restart to windows and changed the power plan to high performance. I see the CPU clocks to 4700MHz, but the Cache only goes to 4400MHz. Ran Aida Cache test, Aida Memory bench, ASUS Realbench and they all show 4400MHz on the cache. If I change the power plan to balanced, then the cache downclocks when idle properly, but only clocks to 4400MHz when under load.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> I've only set the multiplier to 47, restart to windows and changed the power plan to high performance. I see the CPU clocks to 4700MHz, but the Cache only goes to 4400MHz. Ran Aida Cache test, Aida Memory bench, ASUS Realbench and they all show 4400MHz on the cache. If I change the power plan to balanced, then the cache downclocks when idle properly, but only clocks to 4400MHz when under load.


It sounds like it's doing what it's supposed to do to me, default max cache is 4400, if you want it higher set max cache to what you want and leave min on auto to scale by load, if it does anything other than this I must have a prob. (X Hero Wifi)


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> It sounds like it's doing what it's supposed to do to me, default max cache is 4400, if you want it higher set max cache to what you want and leave min on auto to scale by load, if it does anything other than this I must have a prob. (X Hero Wifi)


Hi Menthol,

I did set the max Cache to 47 in bios. However, it does not clock past 4400MHz unless I disable the Ring Down Bin setting. JP has validated that his Ring Down Bin isn't disabled and his 8700K clocks the cache to 4800MHz when stressed.

I'm on the new 0802 Apex bios.


----------



## Menthol

Sorry, I looked at the UEFI screen shot with both on auto, Then yes if you set max cache to 47 then it should boost to 47, I have not touched ring down bin from default, not sure what other setting may affect this


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Sorry, I looked at the UEFI screen shot with both on auto, Then yes if you set max cache to 47 then it should boost to 47, I have not touched ring down bin from default, not sure what other setting may affect this


No need to apologize, I set the Cache multi back to auto for now until I delid and watercool. Will tinker around with that after


----------



## bern43

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> my GS tridents are 12mm from the GPU backplate on my set up. The only issue may be the fan header back by the IO panel if the AQ plate is really sticking out. Much more room between the Ram slots and PCIE 1 on this generation board.


Thanks! Looks like clearance won't be an issue and I'll be able to avoid the dremel.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Hi Menthol,
> 
> I did set the max Cache to 47 in bios. However, it does not clock past 4400MHz unless I disable the Ring Down Bin setting. JP has validated that his Ring Down Bin isn't disabled and his 8700K clocks the cache to 4800MHz when stressed.
> 
> I'm on the new 0802 Apex bios.


asus ring down enabled affects with avx offset

so if youare using offset 2 say 5ghz
it maintains a max difference of 3 multiplier from 50.
so on non avx load u get 47 and avx load you get 45.
disabling ring bus u maintain 47 regardless of avx offset and you can set it as high as u want.

already killed one 8700 that did 5ghz @1.24 ofset 2. 5.3ghz @1.32v offset 2.
this is da result. last core is decaying


after testing a a dozen or so 8700k.

some are insane and can do 5ghz @1.2v offset 2 but is terrible for 5.2-5.3ghz voltage svaling
some only likes offset 0. setting offset has zero reduction in voltage
and some are so terrible it requires 1.45v for 5ghz

most impressive board is msi m5 super fast boot, responsive
but a headache for ram optimization
hero X is stupid easy for 5ghz literally plug and play
giga g7 is horrible, g5 belongs in da bin


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> asus ring down enabled affects with avx offset
> 
> so if youare using offset 2 say 5ghz
> it maintains a max difference of 3 multiplier from 50.
> so on non avx load u get 47 and avx load you get 45.
> disabling ring bus u maintain 47 regardless of avx offset and you can set it as high as u want.


That's odd, I don't have an AVX offset enabled. It's 0 at the moment.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> That's odd, I don't have an AVX offset enabled. It's 0 at the moment.


then something is not right.

also another note for cpu to enter 800mhz .. it only works in windows balance mode. high performance mose setting min mhz does nothing.

tested on msi, asus, giga.

what curious on all z370 is how broken the avx offset is
1. it works the other way arnd .. idle at offset frequency
2. hci memtest can trigger offset . confirmed with the dev theres no avx on it.. ran a debugger and theres avx
3. offset works properly in linux ?


----------



## wickedld9

FYI - Newegg has the Maximus X Apex in stock at MSRP ($349). Note that there is a marketplace seller on Newegg that has it priced at $379.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813119031&Tpk=N82E16813119031


----------



## cstkl1

5ghz offset 0 1.2v ring down enabled so maxed out uncore 47.

Initial Test with prime 26.6 fft 12...

but it sux for 5.2ghz and above voltage scaling.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> asus ring down enabled affects with avx offset
> 
> *so if youare using offset 2 say 5ghz
> it maintains a max difference of 3 multiplier from 50.
> so on non avx load u get 47 and avx load you get 45.
> disabling ring bus u maintain 47 regardless of avx offset and you can set it as high as u want.*
> 
> already killed one 8700 that did 5ghz @1.24 ofset 2. 5.3ghz @1.32v offset 2.
> this is da result. last core is decaying
> 
> 
> after testing a a dozen or so 8700k.
> 
> some are insane and can do 5ghz @1.2v offset 2 but is terrible for 5.2-5.3ghz voltage svaling
> some only likes offset 0. setting offset has zero reduction in voltage
> and some are so terrible it requires 1.45v for 5ghz
> 
> most impressive board is msi m5 super fast boot, responsive
> but a headache for ram optimization
> hero X is stupid easy for 5ghz literally plug and play
> giga g7 is horrible, g5 belongs in da bin


IDK what you guys are doing.. but I do not see any of that. set clock is he clock that it runs at.


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> IDK what you guys are doing.. but I do not see any of that. set clock is he clock that it runs at.


LOL, me neither man. I cleared cmos and re-entered everything again and it still doesn't clock up to max cache. The only thing I haven't tried yet is re-flashing the bios. Will give it a go next week when some more parts come in.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> IDK what you guys are doing.. but I do not see any of that. set clock is he clock that it runs at.


its tha ring down thing. if disabled then no issue.
but when enabled it keeps a max of -3 clock from cpu multiplier..

odd thing msi has the same trait of uncore clocking down with avx offset. but it doesnt limit the max uncore.

but dude u got to see how ridonkolous fast the fast boot is
the default so fast on ssd its like nvme and u cannot even enter the bios
and msi has one more level even faster. 2-3 in windows from boot.


----------



## tknight

Just like Jpmboy, i too am not seeing any of the cache issues either on my 8700K.
I have both the X Hero and the X Apex and on both boards, with all the different bios versions from 0213 to 0802, with Ring down set on default Auto, i then put the same cache multiplier value in both min and max cache and that is what the cache then runs at all the time.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Just like Jpmboy, i too am not seeing any of the cache issues either on my 8700K.
> I have both the X Hero and the X Apex and on both boards, with all the different bios versions from 0213 to 0802, with Ring down set on default Auto, i then put the same cache multiplier value in both min and max cache and that is what the cache then runs at all the time.


Hello

Setting either Ring Down to disabled or Min/Max to the same values will prevent the downclocking.


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Setting either Ring Down to disabled or Min/Max to the same values will prevent the downclocking.


Hi Praz,

Thanks for the clarification. Does this mean in previous Bios versions of the Apex, the ring down bin auto parameter defaulted to disabled?


----------



## Taint3dBulge

Does anyone know when the maximus code will be coming out, and whats your thoughts on its price? I really dont wanna spend over 300 for a board. I could do the Hero, but i love the looks of the code so much, and the vrm cooler is going to be better.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Taint3dBulge*
> 
> Does anyone know when the maximus code will be coming out, and whats your thoughts on its price? I really dont wanna spend over 300 for a board. I could do the Hero, but i love the looks of the code so much, and the vrm cooler is going to be better.


https://www.caseking.de/asus-maximus-x-code-intel-z370-mainboard-rog-sockel-1151-mbas-361.html


----------



## Taint3dBulge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/asus-maximus-x-code-intel-z370-mainboard-rog-sockel-1151-mbas-361.html


Oh nice, but ill wait for when i can get one thru a usa etailer.

Oh jees, $450 bucks lol. um nope. nope nope.


----------



## Bluecow003

B&H is now taking orders for the Code and Formula. The Code is $320 and the Formula is $400. I placed my order for the Code this morning. I received my 8700k from them last week.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=asus%20z370%20maximus&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=


----------



## keplenk

I just received my Z370-G (mATX) and updated the BIOS to Version 0430.

Anyone knows if this version fixes the Vdroop issues?

If yes, is there an easy way for me to confirm?


----------



## Xevi

OMG! Hero is very bad


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xevi*
> 
> OMG! Hero is very bad


ballin. as expected since based on my cpu vid there should be da golden cpu that has lower voltage by 0.08v..

makes u wonder about SL binning right. they aint selling anything golden.


----------



## Taint3dBulge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bluecow003*
> 
> B&H is now taking orders for the Code and Formula. The Code is $320 and the Formula is $400. I placed my order for the Code this morning. I received my 8700k from them last week.
> 
> https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=asus%20z370%20maximus&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=


Just ordered this, a 8700k and some 4000mhz gskil ram.


----------



## wickedld9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> ballin. as expected since based on my cpu vid there should be da golden cpu that has lower voltage by 0.08v..
> 
> makes u wonder about SL binning right. they aint selling anything golden.


You're comparing SL binned processors that they warranty at that frequency for 100% stability to two screenshots of Cinebench with what appears to be sub 16c (60f) ambient temps...or a water chiller.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> You're comparing SL binned processors that they warranty at that frequency for 100% stability to two screenshots of Cinebench with what appears to be sub 16c (60f) ambient temps...or a water chiller.


my opinion pretty long so a spoiler needed here.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



SL binned are one hour realbench and with avx offset 2 they are just guaranteeing one hour stable at the avx clock.
that aint stable dude. as for temps.. SL test them at low ambient tempd and pretty sure its a AC room if not how can he bin cpus with a AIO. He has to have a fix ambient temp.
afaik this is his methodology.

tell me this. so u rather pay 5.2ghz offset 2 1hour realbench stable @1.4v vs existence of cpus that actually does it 1.28-1.3v that are actually golden?? ????? they are not that hard to find and its actually worth that extra dough.

i have tested few x299 X cpus. good ones does 1.04vid avg at multipliet 40. this are goldens as they do 44 at these vid.
the one tier above it is the 1.08v average. and the one most ppl have are the 1.12v. go look back at the 7980xe cpus they sell. golden is the [email protected] infact all golden 78xx/79xx cpu can do this.

for z8700k binning its pretty easy to determine the 5ghz offset 2 voltage with hero X..takes only 5mins.
btw binned already more than a dozen 8700k. dats another story but i had a opportunity to do it.

with da x299 and cofeelake last three months. i aint convinced on SL binned cpus.

binned cpus are what caseking sells. they test on worse case scenarios etc. hence da insane price.

so this is my conclusion last few months wondering why ppl pay for their binned cpu.

their binned 4790k it was given since there were no avx offset. but the current cpus??



end of opinion.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> *SL binned are one hour realbench and with avx offset 2 they are just guaranteeing one hour stable at the avx clock.*
> that aint stable dude. as for temps.. SL test them at low ambient tempd and pretty sure its a AC room if not how can he bin cpus with a AIO. He has to have a fix ambient temp.
> 
> tell me this. so u rather pay 5.2ghz offset 2 1hour realbench stable @1.4v vs existence of cpus that actually does it 1.28-1.3v that are actually golden?? ????? they are not that hard to find and its actually worth that extra dough.
> 
> i have tested few x299 X cpus. good ones does 1.04vid avg at multipliet 40. this are goldens as they do 44 at these vid.
> the one tier above it is the 1.08v average. and the one most ppl have are the 1.12v. go look back at the 7980xe cpus they sell. golden is the [email protected]
> 
> anyway up to you guys. no point trying to convince "true believer" .
> 
> for z8700k binning its pretty easy to determine the 5ghz offset 2 .
> btw binned already more than a dozen 8700k.
> 
> with da x299 and cofeelake last three months. i aint convinced on SL binned cpus.
> 
> binned cpus are what caseking sells. they test on worse case scenarios etc. hence da insane price.


That is not correct SL use their own testing procedure which is much tougher than 1 hour Realbench







Would you consider a 8700K 5.3Ghz @1.42V AVX 0 OCCT large data sets stable golden?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> That is not correct SL use their own testing procedure which is much tougher than 1 hour Realbench


dude its one hour realbench. thats all they do.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> dude its one hour realbench. thats all they do.


Dude you are WRONG!!!!!!!


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> That is not correct SL use their own testing procedure which is much tougher than 1 hour Realbench
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would you consider a 8700K 5.3Ghz @1.42V AVX 0 OCCT large data sets stable golden?


no.

u need
prime 26.6 fft 12,

prime 26.6 blend fft 4 hrs min

repeat with prime 29.3

hci 1000%. oced ram 2000%

gsat 1-2hrs

rb 2.43 4hours min
rb 2.56 4 hours min

thats what i do. with x299 add in prime 28.x same test suite as the above.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Dude you are WRONG!!!!!!!


show me. they stated before it was realbench 1hr.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> show me. they stated before it was realbench 1hr.


They have not used Realbench for at least 6 months maybe longer,check your facts!
https://siliconlottery.com/collections/coffeelake/products/8700k53g?variant=223640158220


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> They have not used Realbench for at least 6 months maybe longer,check your facts!
> https://siliconlottery.com/collections/coffeelake/products/8700k53g?variant=223640158220


i think u need to check da facts. show me where did they state their methodlogy... they just dont mention it anymore.
Quote:


> go through a rigorous stress test routine to ensure stability for the vast majority of use cases.


caseking methodology debauer has mentioned it in his video and thats seriously rigorous.

lol i wonder y they changed for x299. could be since i pointed it out ..rb2.43 is stressfull for non avx for all i7/i9 x299 cpu.
but it wont work for coffelake as it will trigger avx since its using diff avx rules.

just a simple google.. 6 month eh y say.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> i think u need to check da facts. show me where did they state their metdology. they just dont mention it anymore
> caseking methodology debauer has mentioned it in his video and thats seriously rigorous.


there are plenty of posts on this forum where SL state that they use a custom stability test and that they no longer use Realbench!


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> there are plenty of posts on this forum where SL state that they use a custom stability test and that they no longer use Realbench!


show me.

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-3521716/silicon-lottery-binned-cpu.html


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> show me.
> 
> http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-3521716/silicon-lottery-binned-cpu.html


Straight from the horses mouth post #255 http://www.overclock.net/t/1638821/coffee-lake-binning/250 enjoy your humble pie


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Straight from the horses mouth post #255 http://www.overclock.net/t/1638821/coffee-lake-binning/250 enjoy your humble pie


i think you trust ppl too much. rigorous can be just a extension to 2hrs from 1.
*theres no mention of the test suite he uses at all* it can also mean he test 2 diff version of rb .

he aint a public listed company issuing a statement where he can be held liable.

anybody bought a 8700k SL bin??

may i inquire whats the a4 instruction he stated together with the cpu on his test procedure etc etc

for me personally if i was going to dish out cash i need the golden 1.2/1.24v or almost golden 1.28v 5ghz offset 0 8700k.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> i think you trust ppl too much. rigorous can be just a extension to 2hrs from 1.
> *theres no mention of the test suite he uses at all* it can also mean he test 2 diff version of rb .
> 
> he aint a public listed company issuing a statement where he can be held liable.
> 
> anybody bought a 8700k SL bin??
> 
> may i inquire whats the a4 instruction he stated together with the cpu on his test procedure etc etc
> 
> for me personally if i was going to dish out cash i need the golden 1.24v or almost golden 1.28v 5ghz offset 0 8700k.


I have purchased from them several times back when they did use Realbench, no stability issues period, they used Realbench because we the OCN community requested that stress test to be used, so doing what your customer requests is a bad thing? So according to you my 7700K is unstable yet have not had any stability issues since January when I purchased from SL.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I have purchased from them several times back when they did use Realbench, no stability issues period, they used Realbench because we the OCN community requested that stress test to be used, so doing what your customer requests is a bad thing? So according to you my 7700K is unstable yet have not had any stability issues since January when I purchased from SL.


ah no wonder you are so protective.

several times.. they started biz since 4790k.. so 3 times??
4790-6700-7700k?? (assuming z platform)

i am always a skeptic. especially when u see debauer sells at max 5.2ghz and that dude i trust.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> ah no wonder you are so protective.
> 
> several times.. they started biz since 4790k.. so 3 times??
> 4790-6700-7700k?? (assuming z platform)
> 
> i am always a skeptic. especially when u see debauer sells at max 5.2ghz and that dude i trust.


Im not being protective as you put it, but what you stated was factually wrong bottom line, why cant you just admit that?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Im not being protective as you put it, but what you stated was factually wrong bottom line, why cant you just admit that?


tsk tsk tsk. i aint gonna parade arnd my history as a stability nut ..

but its always pointless talking to a person
1. after all this post u cannot even state their current testing suite.
2. they been using rb right up to the x299 i7 /i9 screw up which then they change it to "rigorous" . you claimed they havent used it for 6months.. err do u know when they started selling x299 cpus..which is y no 3 is confirmed.
3.u are defending your purchase but dont seem to know it.

again you fail to see the point. can u guarantee a 5ghz avx offset 0 1.2v cpu from silicon lottery binning. thats the golden cpu right there. the cpu ppl are willing to throw money at.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> tsk tsk tsk. i aint gonna parade arnd my accomplisments as a stability nut ..
> 
> but its always pointless talking to a person
> 1. after all this post u cannot even state their current testing suite.
> 2. they been using rb right up to the x299 i7 /i9 screw up which then they change it to "rigorous" . you claimed they havent used it for 6months.. err do u know when they started selling x299 cpus..which is y no 3 is confirmed.
> 3.u are defending your purchase but dont seem to know it.
> 
> again you fail to see the point. can u guarantee a 5ghz avx offset 0 1.2v cpu from silicon lottery binning. thats the golden cpu right there. the cpu ppl are willing to throw money at.


1. SL dont state exactly how they stress test for business reasons, thats up to them and their customers.
2. I think they changed it just prior to X299 but since I have no interest in X299 I dont know for sure, they changed to their own testing methodology not long after I purchased mine in January.
3. When you run a custom hardline loop binning your own chips is just not practical so buying a binned chip from SL, Caseking, Overclockers U.K or another OCN member makes perfect sense.
Im happy with my purchase as are many other forum members here, but spreading the wrong information by you is wrong yet you cannot admit when you are...whatever dude.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> 1. SL dont state exactly how they stress test for business reasons, thats up to them and their customers.
> 2. I think they changed it just prior to X299 but since I have no interest in X299 I dont know for sure, they changed to their own testing methodology not long after I purchased mine in January.
> 3. When you run a custom hardline loop binning your own chips is just not practical so buying a binned chip from SL, Caseking, Overclockers U.K or another OCN member makes perfect sense.
> Im happy with my purchase as are many other forum members here, but spreading the wrong information by you is wrong yet you cannot admit when you are...whatever dude.


dude you are totally defending your purchase rather than SL.
I guess SL market is ppl like yourself.
good job.

You have no clue on how to bin cpu. Most of us do it with just aircoolers and now aio. and later on fan on da vrm and better ram for imc binning. hwbot guys goes even a step further with mobo and ram slot binning. its all done on air.

you actually accept your no1 and made up a statement to defend their decision
no. 2 you not even aware but choose to ignore it as it infringes on your beliefs

speechless.

btw what wrong information did i spread??


----------



## Xevi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> You're comparing SL binned processors that they warranty at that frequency for 100% stability to two screenshots of Cinebench with what appears to be sub 16c (60f) ambient temps...or a water chiller.


OMG! Use "winter cooler"


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> dude you are totally defending your purchase rather than SL.
> I guess SL market is ppl like yourself.
> good job.
> 
> *You have no clue on how to bin cpu*. Most of us do it with just aircoolers and now aio. and later on fan on da vrm and better ram for imc binning. hwbot guys goes even a step further with mobo and ram slot binning. its all done on air.
> 
> you actually accept your no1 and made up a statement to defend their decision
> no. 2 you not even aware but choose to ignore it as it infringes on your beliefs
> 
> speechless.
> 
> *btw what wrong information did i spread?*?


That fact that you stated silicon lottery use Realbench to bin which they dont! and instead of saying something like "my bad" and leave it at that you had to carry on with an unnecessary argument. Then insult me by saying i dont know how to bin a CPU and by doing so made it personal. All I said was that you got your facts wrong, nothing more!


----------



## Yetyhunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xevi*
> 
> OMG! Use "winter cooler"


What the hell ! What is that thing, a car radiator ?








Nice clocks though.


----------



## Xevi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yetyhunter*
> 
> What the hell ! What is that thing, a car radiator ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice clocks though.












MO-RA3 420 PRO
http://shop.watercool.de/MO-RA3-420-PRO-stainless-steel/en

it is a jewel


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xevi*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MO-RA3 420 PRO
> http://shop.watercool.de/MO-RA3-420-PRO-stainless-steel/en
> 
> it is a jewel


Now thats what I would call a serious water cooling setup


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> ah no wonder you are so protective.
> 
> several times.. they started biz since 4790k.. so 3 times??
> 4790-6700-7700k?? (assuming z platform)
> 
> i am always a skeptic. especially when u see debauer sells at max 5.2ghz and that dude i trust.


Caseking tests without AVX , they use prime 26.6.

Also if importing to the United States, Caseking has a large price premium. If you ever ran a business or did finances for one you would know Silicon Lottery has a rather fair pricing given their binning statistics. If their binning statistics are wrong that's a different story.

edit: also OCUK binning process
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/8packs-no-bs-testing-intel-8700k-and-z370-with-delid-5ghz-and-above-available-from-ocuk.18795256/*
> Just to clarify so I don't need to type it 100 times non AVX stress testing for me is one hour Prime version 25 or 26 and one hour Real Bench.


----------



## Silicon Lottery

This is off topic for this thread, so please continue the conversation elsewhere.

We don't use Realbench anymore. We primarily test with non-AVX prime, and linpack for AVX.


----------



## wickedld9

Can we bring this back on topic please? This thread is supposed to be a helpful for Asus Z370 owners, not dozens of posts arguing over testing methodologies. If you don't like the way a company is run, bring it up in their forum or with them in PM's.

/on topic
I am looking forward to finally getting my hands on an Apex. My Hero has been good but seeing the results from jpmboy and others with an Apex has me excited about getting my hardware dialed in to where I expected it to be when I bought it.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> Can we bring this back on topic please? This thread is supposed to be a helpful for Asus Z370 owners, not dozens of posts arguing over testing methodologies. If you don't like the way a company is run, bring it up in their forum or with them in PM's.
> 
> /on topic
> I am looking forward to finally getting my hands on an Apex. My Hero has been good but seeing the results from jpmboy and others with an Apex has me excited about getting my hardware dialed in to where I expected it to be when I bought it.


My apologies gentlemen back on topic


----------



## jamz

Only reaching 4.8 on 8700K with 1.3V on my Apex :/ Guess i lost.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Hi mates.

Some users here in Spain say Asus Maximus Hero X can only do 1T at 3733MHz max. They even say the board has physical limitations, which I find very odd.

Is that true or it is possible to reach higher frequencies at command rate 1???

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xevi*
> 
> OMG! Use "winter cooler"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


yeah man - the coffee lake line is very sensitive to temperatures. The issue is most likely what we see in an OS based readout, is no where near what is happening in the microenvrionment. Keep an 8700K below 40C and it is a different species.

And just ignore this nonsense about p95 being "needed" for stability testing. It's from the Jurassic cpu epoc and should just be left there for those prime number hunters. It has little to do with establishing stability for a modern gaming rig. There are much better ways to establish 24/7 stability.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah man - the coffee lake line is very sensitive to temperatures. The issue is most likely what we see in an OS based readout, is no where near what is happening in the microenvrionment. Keep an 8700K below 40C and it is a different species.
> 
> And just ignore this nonsense about p95 being "needed" for stability testing. It's from the Jurassic cpu epoc and should just be left there for those prime number hunters. It has little to do with establishing stability for a modern gaming rig. There are much better ways to establish 24/7 stability.


I'm quite interested about the last part. What would you recommend to establish 24/7 stability ?


----------



## Menthol

I have 2 8700K's, they vary wildly in overclockability, one not so good, one better but not what I have seen others post. I need around 1.3v for 5.0 stable
I installed the best of the 2 on an Apex with chiller, what a difference cold water makes, like a different chip, these Apex boards are so nice

I am a little lazy testing stability, for benching, stable for the particular benchmark, my daily rig I run RealBench, XTU, 3Dmark Timespy Extreme, while I have numerous Firefox pages open, watching CNN news live, play a couple games, run HCI memtest and Enjoy, I don't see the need to run everything at max speed for daily use, a comfortable 4.7 to 5.0 core, 4.4 to 4.7 cache, 3200mhz to 3600mhz memory, can't tell difference between OC in daily use

Jpmboy, have you tried memory above 4226mhz?, I have a 4226 C19-19-19 kit, used Raja's preset for 4000mhz c17, and set speed to 4226, easy pesy, running real nice with those settings, will try to see if I can get them to run higher mhz soon, just set it up today. Looking at your XTU submission you used Win 10x64bit with cl12, (did you limit the max memory?)

I have been waiting for someone to post some 4400 to 4600mhz screenshots, results, benchmarks. Anyone?


----------



## Taint3dBulge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I have 2 8700K's, they vary wildly in overclockability, one not so good, one better but not what I have seen others post. I need around 1.3v for 5.0 stable
> I installed the best of the 2 on an Apex with chiller, what a difference cold water makes, like a different chip, these Apex boards are so nice
> 
> I am a little lazy testing stability, for benching, stable for the particular benchmark, my daily rig I run RealBench, XTU, 3Dmark Timespy Extreme, while I have numerous Firefox pages open, watching CNN news live, play a couple games, run HCI memtest and Enjoy, I don't see the need to run everything at max speed for daily use, a comfortable 4.7 to 5.0 core, 4.4 to 4.7 cache, 3200mhz to 3600mhz memory, can't tell difference between OC in daily use
> 
> Jpmboy, have you tried memory above 4226mhz?, I have a 4226 C19-19-19 kit, used Raja's preset for 4000mhz c17, and set speed to 4226, easy pesy, running real nice with those settings, will try to see if I can get them to run higher mhz soon, just set it up today. Looking at your XTU submission you used Win 10x64bit with cl12, (did you limit the max memory?)
> 
> I have been waiting for someone to post some 4400 to 4600mhz screenshots, results, benchmarks. Anyone?


I just picked up some 4000 18-18-18-36(iirc are the timings) Still unsure if i shoulda done that or the cl15 3600, since all i do is play games lol. The occasional benchmark here and there. hope it works well in the maximus x code.

I also wish they would announce the release date of the code/formula's already and get some reviews out. im googling it every day twice i day, so excited lol.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Taint3dBulge*
> 
> I just picked up some 4000 18-18-18-36(iirc are the timings) Still unsure if i shoulda done that or the cl15 3600, since all i do is play games lol. The occasional benchmark here and there. hope it works well in the maximus x code.
> 
> I also wish they would announce the release date of the code/formula's already and get some reviews out. im googling it every day twice i day, so excited lol.


If history is anything to go by Formula X should be an excellent board, waiting for the same


----------



## Essenbe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Taint3dBulge*
> 
> I just picked up some 4000 18-18-18-36(iirc are the timings) Still unsure if i shoulda done that or the cl15 3600, since all i do is play games lol. The occasional benchmark here and there. hope it works well in the maximus x code.
> 
> I also wish they would announce the release date of the code/formula's already and get some reviews out. im googling it every day twice i day, so excited lol.


I'm not sure where you are from, but... Here's one that says expected December 15 https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1376514-REG/asus_rog_maximus_x_formula.html
The Code is the same, https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1376515-REG/asus_rog_maximus_x_code.html


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> I'm quite interested about the last part. What would you recommend to establish 24/7 stability ?


it's best to mix up stressors for a reasonable regime. I use, x264v2 stress test (1.5x thread count) or realbench for 1h, HCi memtest (ram and cache) HWBOTx265 (4-8x, 4K, correction factor >0.95), and if the rig will be used for long 4K encodes, 5 loops (at most) with IBT at 90% of installed ram. Quick RAM stability tests with GSAT (google stressapptest).
I avoid long high current stress tests (like linX and p95 small FFTs) since they really only work the FPU. I cannot understand the logic of training a rig to pass p95 and then never using it to do anything like hunting primes.

Also - be sure to use the AVX offset.. this will allow you to run a 2+ multi higher oc for everything but AVX2. Makes the rig much faster overall.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I have 2 8700K's, they vary wildly in overclockability, one not so good, one better but not what I have seen others post. I need around 1.3v for 5.0 stable
> I installed the best of the 2 on an Apex with chiller, what a difference cold water makes, like a different chip, these Apex boards are so nice
> 
> I am a little lazy testing stability, for benching, stable for the particular benchmark, my daily rig I run RealBench, XTU, 3Dmark Timespy Extreme, while I have numerous Firefox pages open, watching CNN news live, play a couple games, run HCI memtest and Enjoy, I don't see the need to run everything at max speed for daily use, a comfortable 4.7 to 5.0 core, 4.4 to 4.7 cache, 3200mhz to 3600mhz memory, can't tell difference between OC in daily use
> 
> *Jpmboy, have you tried memory above 4226mhz*?, I have a 4226 C19-19-19 kit, used Raja's preset for 4000mhz c17, and set speed to 4226, easy pesy, running real nice with those settings, will try to see if I can get them to run higher mhz soon, just set it up today. Looking at your XTU submission you used Win 10x64bit with cl12, (did you limit the max memory?)
> 
> I have been waiting for someone to post some 4400 to 4600mhz screenshots, results, benchmarks. Anyone?


only 4400c19. I have the 8700K/apex running 4266c17-17-17 with 1.425V (with a 4400c19 kit). Easy, right? 4400 just requires a bclk adjustment, but at that cas, is was no better than 4266c17. I mean, a 8700K at 5.2 (or higher







), cache at 4.8, and ram at 4266 is just stupid quick.

Main thing is to establish ram stability. A core crash - bsod, no big deal (if one should even occur). Ram however can corrupt an OS install and not give any warnings along the way.









lol, the tribe cleared out early this morning - here since Wednesday. What a cluster...


----------



## scracy

nvm


----------



## Taint3dBulge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> it's best to mix up stressors for a reasonable regime. I use, x264v2 stress test (1.5x thread count) or realbench for 1h, HCi memtest (ram and cache) HWBOTx265 (4-8x, 4K, correction factor >0.95), and if the rig will be used for long 4K encodes, 5 loops (at most) with IBT at 90% of installed ram. Quick RAM stability tests with GSAT (google stressapptest).
> I avoid long high current stress tests (like linX and p95 small FFTs) since they really only work the FPU. I cannot understand the logic of training a rig to pass p95 and then never using it to do anything like hunting primes.
> 
> Also - be sure to use the AVX offset.. this will allow you to run a 2+ multi higher oc for everything but AVX2. Makes the rig much faster overall.
> only 4400c19. I have the 8700K/apex running 4266c17-17-17 with 1.425V (with a 4400c19 kit). Easy, right? 4400 just requires a bclk adjustment, but at that cas, is was no better than 4266c17. I mean, a 8700K at 5.2 (or higher
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ), cache at 4.8, and ram at 4266 is just stupid quick.
> 
> Main thing is to establish ram stability. A core crash - bsod, no big deal (if one should even occur). Ram however can corrupt an OS install and not give any warnings along the way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol, the tribe cleared out early this morning - here since Wednesday. What a cluster...


Oh man im so excited for my stuff to come in. Go from a fast for the times. 4.8ghz 4790k 2400mhz 10-12-11-26 ram. To a 8700k and 4000mhz. Lets just jope i won the silicone lottery and can do 5.1-2 with low voltage. ?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Taint3dBulge*
> 
> Oh man im so excited for my stuff to come in. Go from a fast for the times. 4.8ghz 4790k 2400mhz 10-12-11-26 ram. To a 8700k and 4000mhz. Lets just jope i won the silicone lottery and can do 5.1-2 with low voltage. ?


You should be excited, 8700k is fast!


----------



## Xevi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah man - the coffee lake line is very sensitive to temperatures. The issue is most likely what we see in an OS based readout, is no where near what is happening in the microenvrionment. Keep an 8700K below 40C and it is a different species.
> 
> And just ignore this nonsense about p95 being "needed" for stability testing. It's from the Jurassic cpu epoc and should just be left there for those prime number hunters. It has little to do with establishing stability for a modern gaming rig. There are much better ways to establish 24/7 stability.


Hi Jpmboy. I have not had time yet, I have to find out the stability

With the H264










I have another 8700k, it seems better


----------



## Taint3dBulge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Essenbe*
> 
> I'm not sure where you are from, but... Here's one that says expected December 15 https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1376514-REG/asus_rog_maximus_x_formula.html
> The Code is the same, https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1376515-REG/asus_rog_maximus_x_code.html


Ya thats where i ordered from. Someone on another forum said sipping in 7-10 business days from when he ordered on the 23rd. But then we see the 15th on the site. So its like what date is it lol. Would be nice if Asus just gave us a dang date.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xevi*
> 
> Hi Jpmboy. I have not had time yet, I have to find out the stability
> 
> With the H264
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have another 8700k, it seems better
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


nice - but pretty hard to compare chips with x265 and R15.
If you use x265 as a stability test, set it up with at least 4x overkill:
This is 5.2/4.8 daily

correction factor > 0.95


----------



## Essenbe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Taint3dBulge*
> 
> Ya thats where i ordered from. Someone on another forum said sipping in 7-10 business days from when he ordered on the 23rd. But then we see the 15th on the site. So its like what date is it lol. Would be nice if Asus just gave us a dang date.


I don't get how that stuff works unless they get someplace to drop ship them. I ordered a Z370 Apex board from Amazon. They say it will have them in stock December 1st. They sent me an email saying mine should arrive on Tuesday 11/28. Same thing happened with a case I bought from them a while ago. I got it 3 weeks before they said they would receive the first one. Who knows.


----------



## Bluecow003

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Taint3dBulge*
> 
> Ya thats where i ordered from. Someone on another forum said sipping in 7-10 business days from when he ordered on the 23rd. But then we see the 15th on the site. So its like what date is it lol. Would be nice if Asus just gave us a dang date.


Yeah, that was me. I ordered the Code from B&H on Thursday morning (I had been checking their site multiple times a day for the last week or so leading up to that) and it said it would be available in 7-10 days when I first saw them available. By the next morning B&H's site said December 15th. I'll post back here once I get shipping notification.


----------



## chibi

At what point do you need to adjust bclock to gain higher ram frequency? I recall kabylake, it was anything more than 4200MHz.


----------



## Taint3dBulge

So an update on the maximus x code. A rep from b&h emailed me, stating that they should receive the product by the 15th at the latest. Orders will be filled in order by date...? So not sure if they expect it sooner or not.


----------



## MinDokan

Is the Asus Apex compatible with gamefirst?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MinDokan*
> 
> Is the Asus Apex compatible with gamefirst?


It's a ROG board so it should be. https://www.asus.com/us/support/FAQ/1009765/
and:


----------



## SpeedyIV

I am getting ready to take the i7 8700K plunge, despite some reservations about PCIE lane and dual channel RAM limitations. That said, I have limited my MOBO selections to an Asus PRIME Z370-A or a ROG STRIX Z370-E GAMING. I have not seen many posts from people who bought the PRIME Z370-A. Best I can tell, these are about the same board with the following differences.

• STRIX Z370-E has WIFI, Blue Tooth 5.0, 2 x RGB LED Headers, 1 more USB3.1 header
• PRIME Z370-A has MEM OK and PWR_SW buttons, Thunderbolt III support (no card)
• Audio is different (better on Strix) but not a concern for me

PCIE Slots appear to be the same according to specs and reviews, but the motherboard layouts in the Owner's Manuals are different. The 3 full length slots on the PRIME are labelled _PCIEx16_1, PCIEx16_2, PCIEx16_3_ but on the STRIX Z370-E they are labelled _PCIEx16x8_1, PCIE_x8_2, PCIEX4_. The Expansion Slot specs also use different terminology

*Prime Z370-A and Strix Z370-E (same)*
_2 x PCIe 3.0/2.0 x16 slots (supports x16, x8/x8, x8/x4+x4*, x8+x4+x4/x0**)
1 x PCI Express 3.0/2.0 x16 slot (max. at x4 mode, compatible with PCIe x1,
x2 and x4 devices)
4 x PCI Express 3.0/2.0 x1 slots
** The M.2_1 socket shares SATA_1 port when use M.2 SATA mode device. Adjust
BIOS settings to use a SATA device.
*** The M.2_2 socket shares SATA_56 ports when use M.2 PCIE mode device in X4
mode. Adjust BIOS settings to use M.2 PCIE devices in X4 mode._

*Prime Z370-A*
_* For 2 Intel® SSD on CPU support, install a Hyper M.2 X16 card (sold separately)
into the *PCIeX16_2* slot, then enable this card under BIOS settings.
** For 3 Intel® SSD on CPU support, install a Hyper M.2 X16 card (sold separately)
into the *PCIeX16_1* slot, then enable this card under BIOS settings.
** Supports PCIE RAID configurations via onboard M.2 storages.*_

*Strix Z370-E*
_* For 2 Intel® SSDs on CPU support, install a Hyper M.2 X16 card (sold separately)
into the *PCIeX8_2* slot, and enable this card under BIOS settings.
** For 3 Intel® SSDs on CPU support, install a Hyper M.2 X16 card (sold separately)
into the *PCIeX16/x8_1* slot, and enable this card under BIOS settings.
_
So, are the PCIE lanes the same or not? Does the Strix support PCIE RAID? Are either of the M.2 slot lanes direct to the CPU or are they always routed through the Z370 chipset? Sounds like the latter.

Regarding PCIE lanes, I want to make sure I understand - there are 16 PCIE3.0 lanes direct to the CPU and another 24 PCIE3.0 in the Z370 chipset through a DMI3.0 link, so I can never have 2 GPUs with both running at x16. What I do get is

• A 10-port USB3.1 controller with 6 x 10Gbps ports and 4 x 5 Gbps ports
• A SATA AHCI/RAID controller with 6 x 6 Gbps ports

*RAM*
I am coming from an i7 5820K with 32 gig of quad channel RAM and am trying to decide what kit to put in this Z370 build. I am going with Trident Z for sure (no RGB - too buggy). On the G. Skill site, I can select 4 x 8-gig, Dual Channel, and every kit that comes up has a "Q" in the part number (indicating quad channel). I can pick any of them, and the QVL will list every Asus X370 board out there. Why is that?

Even though the 4 x 8-gig kits list the Z370 boards, I think my best bet is to go with a 2 x 16-gig kit that is dual channel. I believe the following are all Samsung B-Die. I think since they are 16-gig sticks, they are all dual sided, dual rank. At the moment, the C15D looks like the best deal, though all the prices are pretty terrible.

F4-3200C14D-32GTZ ($500 New Egg)
F4-3200C15D-32GTZ ($410 New Egg)
F4-3200C16D-32GTZ ($450 New Egg)

Economy option is to just put in a 16-gig kit - 2 x 8 gig sticks.

G. Skill F4-3200C14D-16GTZ ($235 New Egg)
G. Skill F4-3200C15D-16GTZ ($213 New Egg)
G. Skill F4-3200C16D-16GTZ ($210 New Egg)

In this pack, the C14D is worth it for the relatively small price increase. Comments/advice on RAM appreciated.

*COOLING*
Finally, I am planning to use a Corsair H110i (CoolIT Pump) 280mm rad to cool the CPU. I am not sold on doing a de-lid yet (it would be my first). If I can get a good stable overclock at 4.8GHz with the 32-gig of RAM at 3200 (with best timings I can muster), I will be content. I don't need to cross the 5.0GHz barrier, at least for a 24/7 OC. What kind of temps can I expect with no de-lid and a 280mm AIO cooler?

I am getting ready to purchase the CPU at Amazon which is supposed to have stock on December 01. Fingers crossed! Thanks for any and all opinions, clarifications, and sage advice! Sorry for long post.


----------



## Jpmboy

the 3200c14 2x8GB kit is one of the better overclocking kits across platforms. So, if 16GB is enough (and it is for a gaming rig) you could go with that especially with ram prices the way they are atrm. 4.8 on the core is very doable. And yes, sli will run at gen3 x8 as shown in the manual(s)


----------



## Scotty99

Got my PC up and running, to my surprise with a pentium stock cooler my 8700k idles at sub 30c lol.

Anyways my question is does asus have a utility that checks for driver/bios updates? I cant find anything other than asus aura and ai suite under my boards support page (and a few other weird ones like ram cache).

Thanks.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the 3200c14 2x8GB kit is one of the better overclocking kits across platforms. So, if 16GB is enough (and it is for a gaming rig) you could go with that especially with ram prices the way they are atrm. 4.8 on the core is very doable. And yes, sli will run at gen3 x8 as shown in the manual(s)


Thanks Jmpboy. Yes I would probably be fine with a 16-gig kit but I am not really a gamer. I do a lot of CAD and REVIT work which is why I want the 6 cores. I also have a tendency to do a lot of multi-tasking so I do prefer 32 gigs of RAM. I almost went X299 but that platform gets expensive fast. I am hoping the 8700K will outperform my 5820K by a decent margin. I am not planning a 2 GPU build so the x8x8 limitation does not bother me. I may just go with the IGPU and not even put a GPU in the rig!

I am just trying to make sure that the PCIE arrangement on these 2 Asus boards are the same, and that I understand the rest of the differences between them. I think the StrixZ370-E has the right combination of features and price point that I want. The Prime Z370-A is almost identical so far as I can tell, with the differences I listed in my post. There just does not seem to be many people posting that have the Prime.


----------



## Scotty99

So its up and running and everything seems to be great except one thing, the motherboard rgb lights do not turn off when i power the PC down lol.

Anyone know how to fix that? Strix z370-f btw, fully updated bios/drivers.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So its up and running and everything seems to be great except one thing, the motherboard rgb lights do not turn off when i power the PC down lol.
> 
> Anyone know how to fix that? Strix z370-f btw, fully updated bios/drivers.


Yes in the bios under the Advanced Menu, there is the submenu Onboard Devices Configuration and there you will find the options to turn the rgb on or off for when the system is running or not.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Thanks Jmpboy. Yes I would probably be fine with a 16-gig kit but I am not really a gamer. I do a lot of CAD and REVIT work which is why I want the 6 cores. I also have a tendency to do a lot of multi-tasking so I do prefer 32 gigs of RAM. I almost went X299 but that platform gets expensive fast. I am hoping the 8700K will outperform my 5820K by a decent margin. I am not planning a 2 GPU build so the x8x8 limitation does not bother me. I may just go with the IGPU and not even put a GPU in the rig!
> 
> I am just trying to make sure that the PCIE arrangement on these 2 Asus boards are the same, and that I understand the rest of the differences between them. I think the StrixZ370-E has the right combination of features and price point that I want. The Prime Z370-A is almost identical so far as I can tell, with the differences I listed in my post. There just does not seem to be many people posting that have the Prime.


if you do 32GB via 2x16GB sticks.. don't expect a lot of headroom for a ram OC. In that case, a 4x8GB 3200c14 kit would be my choice for a 4-slot dual channel board. Strix is a fine MB.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So its up and running and everything seems to be great except one thing, the motherboard rgb lights do not turn off when i power the PC down lol.
> 
> Anyone know how to fix that? Strix z370-f btw, fully updated bios/drivers.


as tknight said, it's in the bios advanced menu>onboard devices...


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Yes in the bios under the Advanced Menu, there is the submenu Onboard Devices Configuration and there you will find the options to turn the rgb on or off for when the system is running or not.


Awesome ill give that a shot in a bit









Side note, is MCE enabled by default on asus boards even when not touching XMP? Looking at hwmonitor all my cores have hit 4.7ghz at some point since ive been setting this pc up.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Awesome ill give that a shot in a bit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Side note, is MCE enabled by default on asus boards even when not touching XMP? Looking at hwmonitor all my cores have hit 4.7ghz at some point since ive been setting this pc up.


intel MCE is always on, ASUS MCE can be disabled.. but neither is in effect once you synch cores or run multipliers higher than the stock max turbo multiplier.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> intel MCE is always on, ASUS MCE can be disabled.. but neither is in effect once you synch cores or run multipliers higher than the stock max turbo multiplier.


Not sure what you mean by that, my cores are all going to 4.7 at stock it should be 4.3 aye? Obviously not relevant once i get my actual CPU cooler, but just installing things ive seen 70c lol.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Not sure what you mean by that, my cores are all going to 4.7 at stock it should be 4.3 aye? Obviously not relevant once i get my actual CPU cooler, but just installing things ive seen 70c lol.


If there all hitting 4.7 ASUS MCE is on, disable it and all will be 4.3 aye, the latest bios 0802 sets ASUS MCE to off by default on my Hero


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> If there all hitting 4.7 ASUS MCE is on, disable it and all will be 4.3 aye, the latest bios 0802 sets ASUS MCE to off by default on my Hero


Its off now and all my cores are hitting 4.5 I dont get it, whatevs its under 90c while gaming lol.

Odd thing is none of my cores are hitting 4.7ghz with mce off /shrug.


----------



## Menthol

Intel boost, 6 cores 4.3, one core 4.7, right now I am on all defaults and I constantly see all 6 at 4.4 or higher


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Got my PC up and running, to my surprise with a pentium stock cooler my 8700k idles at sub 30c lol.
> 
> Anyways my question is does asus have a utility that checks for driver/bios updates? I cant find anything other than asus aura and ai suite under my boards support page (and a few other weird ones like ram cache).
> 
> Thanks.


Hello

Not sure where you are looking but all the usual file are available when I look.


----------



## Taint3dBulge

Quick help.

Im about ready to cancel the code and go with the apex since i can buy one for the same price.

What does the code have that is better then the apex, besides the armor, and it looks like the onboard audio is a bit better on the code. Also does the dimm.2 riser have any performance decreases, or cause extra latency?

Im just way way to antsy to wait. lol.


----------



## MinDokan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> It's a ROG board so it should be. https://www.asus.com/us/support/FAQ/1009765/
> and:


Sounds legit. Thanks!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Taint3dBulge*
> 
> Quick help.
> 
> Im about ready to cancel the code and go with the apex since i can buy one for the same price.
> 
> What does the code have that is better then the apex, besides the armor, and it looks like the onboard audio is a bit better on the code. Also does the dimm.2 riser have any performance decreases, or cause extra latency?
> 
> Im just way way to antsy to wait. lol.


Here is a nice comparative side by side. [ https://rog.asus.com/articles/maximus-motherboards/rog-introduces-new-z370-gaming-motherboards-for-coffee-lake/ ]
Code has WiFi, the Apex has two NIC devices.

The M.2 should include less latency I believe.

Also, Apex has only 4 SATA while Code has 6.


----------



## Taint3dBulge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MinDokan*
> 
> Sounds legit. Thanks!
> Here is a nice comparative side by side. [ https://rog.asus.com/articles/maximus-motherboards/rog-introduces-new-z370-gaming-motherboards-for-coffee-lake/ ]
> Code has WiFi, the Apex has two NIC devices.
> 
> The M.2 should include less latency I believe.
> 
> Also, Apex has only 4 SATA while Code has 6.


Thanks but decided to go with the APEX, since i can get it here by the end of the week, and its actually cheaper shipped then the code. Plus after watching. 



 That ya, i think this is going to be a great board. Love the armor of the code, but this looks like it might just be a better board overall!


----------



## kevindd992002

Is the X Formula even worth it for its price?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Is the X Formula even worth it for its price?


Based on my experience with Maximus VIII Formula I would say yes it is worth it







But if you are not using a custom loop but still want most of the features then the Code is probably more suitable.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Based on my experience with Maximus VIII Formula I would say yes it is worth it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But if you are not using a custom loop but still want most of the features then the Code is probably more suitable.


Hey man, you again  As you know, I will be building a new system with a full custom water loop (my first time to build one as I'm using a Swiftech H220X now) but I just can't justify the cost of the Formula. If money is no object to me, I would no doubt go for the Formula. But what I'm wondering about is that if I go with just the Code, would my VRM's be just fine knowing that I will be overclocking the 8700K to their max potential?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Hey man, you again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you know, I will be building a new system with a full custom water loop (my first time to build one as I'm using a Swiftech H220X now) but I just can't justify the cost of the Formula. If money is no object to me, I would no doubt go for the Formula. But what I'm wondering about is that if I go with just the Code, would my VRM's be just fine knowing that I will be overclocking the 8700K to their max potential?


Until both boards are reviewed it is hard to say, but given how hot the VRM's seem to be on other boards with an overclocked 8700K I feel the VRM water block is more important than ever. If you were to buy the Formula no doubt you would keep it for a long time given in terms of gaming performance there really is not much difference between 7700K and 8700K. Rumours going around about 9700K being 8 cores 16 thread which I believe will be compatible with Z370 if Intel's history of a socket change every 2 generations is anything to go by. I dont think we will see DDR5 or PCI-E 4/5.0 for at least another 2 years maybe longer. Up to you how often you want to rebuild your P.C but personally buy the board that best suits your current needs and potential future needs







You could of course buy a Hero X board and buy a mono block which would be cheaper.


----------



## Taint3dBulge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Hey man, you again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you know, I will be building a new system with a full custom water loop (my first time to build one as I'm using a Swiftech H220X now) but I just can't justify the cost of the Formula. If money is no object to me, I would no doubt go for the Formula. But what I'm wondering about is that if I go with just the Code, would my VRM's be just fine knowing that I will be overclocking the 8700K to their max potential?


There was a review that was just done by OC3D for the APEX. He was doing a oc of 5.1ghz and the VRM's on that board reached a max of 50c under stress tests. That was with no fans in the case expt 1 exhaust fan. So that was as he said, "worst case scenario." Also mind you with the APEX the vrm cooler isnt huge by any means. So not sure if the code will have quite that kind of temps for the VRM's but im sure its not going to be to much more then that. But alas thats why i dropped my order on the code. Not wanting to wait 2 or more weeks for it. Plus the lighting on the apex is amazing, them under board leds, gonna make my rig look so good. LOL even though im just going to do pure white with everything.









Edit: Here ya go.


----------



## RedHawk

For Scotty99 ... So its up and running and everything seems to be great except one thing, the motherboard rgb lights do not turn off when i power the PC down lol.
Anyone know how to fix that? Strix z370-f btw, fully updated bios/drivers.

Open Aura program & set to Turn It OFF


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Not sure what you mean by that, my cores are all going to 4.7 at stock it should be 4.3 aye? Obviously not relevant once i get my actual CPU cooler, but just installing things ive seen 70c lol.


multicore enhancement... there are ASUS and Intel. You can disable ASUS, but not Intel MCE which is the underlying MCE.
But yeah - I know very little about either... what's "stock".


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Until both boards are reviewed it is hard to say, but given how hot the VRM's seem to be on other boards with an overclocked 8700K I feel the VRM water block is more important than ever. If you were to buy the Formula no doubt you would keep it for a long time given in terms of gaming performance there really is not much difference between 7700K and 8700K. Rumours going around about 9700K being 8 cores 16 thread which I believe will be compatible with Z370 if Intel's history of a socket change every 2 generations is anything to go by. I dont think we will see DDR5 or PCI-E 4/5.0 for at least another 2 years maybe longer. Up to you how often you want to rebuild your P.C but personally buy the board that best suits your current needs and potential future needs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You could of course buy a Hero X board and buy a mono block which would be cheaper.


Yeah, plus I live in a tropical country where ambient temps are around 34C. What VRM temps should I be looking for anyway so that I can consider it in the "good zone" for overclocking? My current system is a Z68 with a 2600K CPU so you can say that I rarely do upgrades.

Is the VRM block in the formula restrictive?

One more thing, I'm sure the Code will be easier to resell in the future than the Formula, right?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Taint3dBulge*
> 
> There was a review that was just done by OC3D for the APEX. He was doing a oc of 5.1ghz and the VRM's on that board reached a max of 50c under stress tests. That was with no fans in the case expt 1 exhaust fan. So that was as he said, "worst case scenario." Also mind you with the APEX the vrm cooler isnt huge by any means. So not sure if the code will have quite that kind of temps for the VRM's but im sure its not going to be to much more then that. But alas thats why i dropped my order on the code. Not wanting to wait 2 or more weeks for it. Plus the lighting on the apex is amazing, them under board leds, gonna make my rig look so good. LOL even though im just going to do pure white with everything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Here ya go.


Hmmm, that's interesting. I'm assuming the Code has better airflow than the Apex. If that's true then I would think it's more practical to go with the Code.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Yeah, plus I live in a tropical country where ambient temps are around 34C. What VRM temps should I be looking for anyway so that I can consider it in the "good zone" for overclocking? My current system is a Z68 with a 2600K CPU so you can say that I rarely do upgrades.
> 
> Is the VRM block in the formula restrictive?
> 
> One more thing, I'm sure the Code will be easier to resell in the future than the Formula, right?
> 
> Hmmm, that's interesting. I'm assuming the Code has better airflow than the Apex. If that's true then I would think it's more practical to go with the Code.


LOL tell me about it its 12.50AM here and my ambient is still 30 degrees C







Lower VRM temps are always better but that said if the info about the Apex VRM is correct and assuming Code is similar in heatsink and VRM design then you shouldn't have any issue with the Code board, most VRMs can run up to 100 degrees C without any real issues. The water block on the Formula is not at all restrictive, put it this way I have 2 GPU blocks plus 2 radiators plus CPU block and VRM block with a single D5 pump that only needs too run at around 50% VRM temp sits at a max of 60 degrees C under a heavy load on a hot day.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> LOL tell me about it its 12.50AM here and my ambient is still 30 degrees C
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lower VRM temps are always better but that said if the info about the Apex VRM is correct and assuming Code is similar in heatsink and VRM design then you shouldn't have any issue with the Code board, most VRMs can run up to 100 degrees C without any real issues. The water block on the Formula is not at all restrictive, put it this way I have 2 GPU blocks plus 2 radiators plus CPU block and VRM block with a single D5 pump that only needs too run at around 50% VRM temp sits at a max of 60 degrees C under a heavy load on a hot day.


Aren't you envious of people who have problems with the cold yet we suffer because of the heat? Argh, I really hope I can resist the urge to go with the Formula.

Will lower VRM temps (assuming they're below 100C) produce potentially higher CPU OC's without considering other factors?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Aren't you envious of people who have problems with the cold yet we suffer because of the heat? Argh, I really hope I can resist the urge to go with the Formula.
> 
> *Will lower VRM temps (assuming they're below 100C) produce potentially higher CPU OC'*s without considering other factors?


only at the limits of the OC of the chip, and with warm water cooling (







) you need not worry about that. Airflow on the APEX is excellent - there is no ROG armor. Running my 8700K at 5.2 and I rarely see the 40s. Add 10C for your ambient temperature.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> only at the limits of the OC of the chip, and with warm water cooling (
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) you need not worry about that. Airflow on the APEX is excellent - there is no ROG armor. Running my 8700K at 5.2 and I rarely see the 40s. Add 10C for your ambient temperature.


Are you saying I should expect hotter temps with the Code because of the ROG armor? Would the Hero be better in terms of temps then? I thought that ROG armor provided better temps.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Are you saying I should expect hotter temps with the Code because of the ROG armor? Would the Hero be better in terms of temps then? I thought that ROG armor provided better temps.


Go with the Hero. Great board. And I would not worry too much about VRM temperatures unless you plan on running p95 or LinX 24/7 or something. For a gaming rig, you just need some decent air flow on the heat sink and it's fine.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if you do 32GB via 2x16GB sticks.. don't expect a lot of headroom for a ram OC. In that case, a 4x8GB 3200c14 kit would be my choice for a 4-slot dual channel board. Strix is a fine MB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> as tknight said, it's in the bios advanced menu>onboard devices...


Huh. I thought that since it's a dual channel platform, 2 sticks would perform better than 4. I thought 2 was always better than 4 in a dual channel system. The Apex only has 2 DIMM slots and is optimized for highest possible memory OC. Also, less stain on IMC, less power, less heat. May I ask why you prefer a 4-stick kit?

All of the G.Skill 4 x 8-gig Trident Z SKUs are listed as quad channel, but they do list most (all?) of the Asus Z370 boards on their QVLs. I have looked at F4-3200C14Q-32GTZ, C15Q, C16Q, F4-3400C16Q-32GTZ - all are quad channel but list dual channel Z370 MOBOs on their QVLs. I am missing something...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Huh. I thought that since it's a dual channel platform, 2 sticks would perform better than 4. I thought 2 was always better than 4 in a dual channel system. The Apex only has 2 DIMM slots and is optimized for highest possible memory OC. Also, less stain on IMC, less power, less heat. May I ask why you prefer a 4-stick kit?
> 
> All of the G.Skill 4 x 8-gig Trident Z SKUs are listed as quad channel, but they do list most (all?) of the Asus Z370 boards on their QVLs. I have looked at F4-3200C14Q-32GTZ, C15Q, C16Q, F4-3400C16Q-32GTZ - all are quad channel but list dual channel Z370 MOBOs on their QVLs. I am missing something...


because 16GB sticks are not as "overclockable" as 8GB sticks. it's not simply th enumber of sticks that affects the IMC load, it is also the ram density.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> because 16GB sticks are not as "overclockable" as 8GB sticks. it's not simply th enumber of sticks that affects the IMC load, it is also the ram density.


I think I understand what you are saying - you are talking about Ranks. The 2 x16-gig sticks are all Dual Rank, Double Sided. The 4 x 8-gig sticks may be Single Rank or Dual Rank (probably single). Single Rank is preferred. Is this correct?

Doing some Googling, there seems to be advantages and disadvantages to each setup, or at least differences of opinion. Here is a sampling of what I found.

*2x16 is Better*
_With a 2x16 kit, you should be able to run them at a CR or command-rate of 1 instead of the default CR=2, although you might indeed have to tweak VDIMM, VCCIO or both slightly to make that work. But you can't so easily set CR=1 for a 4x8 kit.
Having all four dimms populated will put more stress on the CPU IMC versus 2 dimms populated
At 4x8gb sticks, you limitation is mostly the quality of the Mobo and the IMC while 2 x 16gb the limitation is mainly memory IC (with slight IMC contribution) related
_
*4x8 is Better*
_A 2-DIMM kit will not offer any real advantage worth paying for unless it has double-density and half the ranks vs the 4-DIMM kit
Single rank 8GB modules are easier on an IMC than the 16GB modules 
Even though the memory is dual channel, you can get a slight performance boost from filling all the ram banks _

If I go with a 2x16-gig kit, I have the option to expand, if willing to accept the uncertainty of mixing kits. From what I can tell, if I want to ensure I get Samsung B-Die, I have to go with a C14 kit, though the C15 and C16 kits are typically all B-Die, but not guaranteed to be. If I can hit 3200MHz I will be content. Higher would be great and I will push them to see what I can get but in the end, I don't need my RAM on the bleeding edge. I would rather lock it in at a slower speed with tighter timings and not have to worry about corrupting the OS or anything else.

So after all of that, if I go with a 4 x 8-gig kit, it will be F4-3200C14Q-32GTZ which will be B-die for sure and cost the most, F4-3200C15Q-32GTZ or 16Q which will probably be B-Die, or maybe take a chance on F4-3000C14Q-32GTZ and hope I can get them to 3200 MHz which should be entirely possible. I still don't understand why Quad Chanel kits are going into a Dual Channel MOBO.

Thanks !


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Go with the Hero. Great board. And I would not worry too much about VRM temperatures unless you plan on running p95 or LinX 24/7 or something. For a gaming rig, you just need some decent air flow on the heat sink and it's fine.


I would definitely run p95 but only for stability testing.

I don't know but I like the looks of the Code better because of the Armor and if I remember reading it correctly it has a better m.2 heatsink than the Hero.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> I would definitely run p95 but only for stability testing.
> 
> I don't know but I like the looks of the Code better because of the Armor and if I remember reading it correctly it has a better m.2 heatsink than the Hero.


Both Code and Formula available in my country only a $60 difference in price, you could look at the armour in 2 ways with a water loop in that if you get a small leak the armour could provide some protection from water ingress but conversely the armour could also trap any water from a water leak







Ultimately I think you would be happy with any of the ROG boards.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> *I would definitely run p95 but only for stability testing.
> *
> I don't know but I like the looks of the Code better because of the Armor and if I remember reading it correctly it has a better m.2 heatsink than the Hero.


there's better ways to establish system OC stability. Either way, vrm temps are not going to be a limiting factor on this platform.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Both Code and Formula available in my country only a $60 difference in price, you could look at the armour in 2 ways with a water loop in that if you get a small leak the armour could provide some protection from water ingress but conversely the armour could also trap any water from a water leak
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ultimately I think you would be happy with any of the ROG boards.


Yeah, lucky you! I have the Code pre-ordered at B&H and says expected availability is Dec. 15 but I'm not sure if that's even accurate given their history with the 8700K availability.

That makes sense. In the end, you would want to make sure there are no leaks in your loop







What's the main purpose of the armor anyway?

And are there other notable differences between the Hero and the Code?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> there's better ways to establish system OC stability. Either way, vrm temps are not going to be a limiting factor on this platform.


Gotcha! This makes me lean toward the Code


----------



## bl4ckdot

Code and Formula have showed up on one of the biggest store in France (LDLC; 475€ and 400€).


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Yeah, lucky you! I have the Code pre-ordered at B&H and says expected availability is Dec. 15 but I'm not sure if that's even accurate given their history with the 8700K availability.
> 
> That makes sense. In the end, you would want to make sure there are no leaks in your loop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's the main purpose of the armor anyway?
> 
> And are there other notable differences between the Hero and the Code?
> Gotcha! This makes me lean toward the Code


The armour is really only there for looks, it might stop a clumsy person damaging some components whilst inserting graphics cards etc, but you would have to be really clumsy, being able to paint the armour to a colour that suits a build might be appealing to some







Hero doesn't have WiFi or Bluetooth, chipset lanes might be configured differently and VRM's may be different other than that not a lot by the looks of it.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Code and Formula have showed up on one of the biggest store in France (LDLC; 475€ and 400€).


So Code or Formula?


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> So Code or Formula?


Most probably Code if I can't get a discount on the Formula


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Most probably Code if I can't get a discount on the Formula


Fair enough, you guys pay even more than we do at least for the Formula X here $699AU Code $639. Your prices Formula $745AU Code $627AU


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> The armour is really only there for looks, it might stop a clumsy person damaging some components whilst inserting graphics cards etc, but you would have to be really clumsy, being able to paint the armour to a colour that suits a build might be appealing to some
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hero doesn't have WiFi or Bluetooth, chipset lanes might be configured differently and VRM's may be different other than that not a lot by the looks of it.


I thought the Hero has a Wifi version, at least that's what I'm saying available on Amazon as of the moment.

In previous gen chipsets, are the VRM chips of the Code generally better than the Hero?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> I thought the Hero has a Wifi version, at least that's what I'm saying available on Amazon as of the moment.
> 
> In previous gen chipsets, are the VRM chips of the Code generally better than the Hero?


There is a WiFi version of the Hero but it is not available here at least not yet, as far as VRM's go to be honest I dont know if they are the same on each board Alpha C may know


----------



## Xevi

My 8700k are very bad







, the results look very bad


----------



## Jpmboy

you are kidding - right? 5.6GHz is bad? WTH?


----------



## Bluecow003

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you are kidding - right? 5.6GHz is bad? WTH?


Looks at those voltages though! 1.44 and 1.504? Must have some serious cooling or something. I thought most people were limited to like 1.35v.


----------



## encrypted11

Asus are using Realtek WiFi modules with Z370.

If you took the hero and needed WiFi you probably should get that variant. The non-WiFi version has a preinstalled backplate with the IO cover and there are no antenna cutouts. No idea if the connector's present underneath or dormant solder points.

But you probably can't go wrong with a Maximus, Rampage, or Extreme ROG board.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bluecow003*
> 
> Looks at those voltages though! 1.44 and 1.504? Must have some serious cooling or something. I thought most people were limited to like 1.35v.


and you think that's bad for those frequencies? It's right where it should be.


----------



## wickedld9

Got the Hero out and the Apex swapped in. Great experience so far, booted straight off of XMP without any issues (4266MHz). I was having trouble keeping things stable above 3500MHz no matter what timings I used with the two Hero boards that I have used. The Apex is rock solid. Going to game on it a bit tonight and start pushing clocks over the weekend.
For anyone else like me on the fence about picking up the Apex, I talked myself out of it when B&H had stock but (obviously) decided to bite the bullet and very happy that I did. I blame Jpmboy and his awesome results!


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> Got the Hero out and the Apex swapped in. Great experience so far, booted straight off of XMP without any issues (4266MHz). I was having trouble keeping things stable above 3500MHz no matter what timings I used with the two Hero boards that I have used. The Apex is rock solid. Going to game on it a bit tonight and start pushing clocks over the weekend.
> For anyone else like me on the fence about picking up the Apex, I talked myself out of it when B&H had stock but (obviously) decided to bite the bullet and very happy that I did. *I blame Jpmboy and his awesome results!*


He's such a bad influence


----------



## Scotty99

Anyone know how to keep asus gpu helper to stop asking for permissions when i first boot pc up? As i understand that is part of AI suite (although i dont see it anywhere) but im not sure what it does.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> He's such a bad influence


----------



## tiefox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wickedld9*
> 
> Got the Hero out and the Apex swapped in. Great experience so far, booted straight off of XMP without any issues (4266MHz). I was having trouble keeping things stable above 3500MHz no matter what timings I used with the two Hero boards that I have used. The Apex is rock solid. Going to game on it a bit tonight and start pushing clocks over the weekend.
> For anyone else like me on the fence about picking up the Apex, I talked myself out of it when B&H had stock but (obviously) decided to bite the bullet and very happy that I did. I blame Jpmboy and his awesome results!


which memory kit are you using ? my gskill rgb 4266 does not even post with 4266 in the apex, max I can get is 3733 @ 15cas


----------



## h1ghOptane

rog.asus.com says
"CPU-connected SSD RAID arrays will be supported on *all* of our Z370 motherboards *except the non-WiFi version of the Maximus X Hero*."

Is this for a commercial reason (e.g. product segmentation) or is there a technical reason (like a unique identifier hidden in wifi MAC or PHY)?


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tiefox*
> 
> which memory kit are you using ? my gskill rgb 4266 does not even post with 4266 in the apex, max I can get is 3733 @ 15cas


I have no issue at all with my X Apex and Gskill 4226 kit using XMP or Raja's 4000 preset at 4266, in fact easier than on my IX apex and 7700k


----------



## wickedld9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tiefox*
> 
> which memory kit are you using ? my gskill rgb 4266 does not even post with 4266 in the apex, max I can get is 3733 @ 15cas


I have the GSkill 4266C19-GTZA kit.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Hello!

I just picked up my Z370 Hero X today (Still in need of a CPU and mem).

I saw that ASUS now includes a little bracket which you can mount a 40/50 mm fan on. I have a Fractal fan laying around (50mm) would it be necessary to use it when overclocking?

I will be delidding, under custom water and hopefully hit 5-5.2 ghz. I normally have a 120mm (spinning at 700 RPM or so) fan just for blowing on the VRMs, but that was on the hotter X299 and X99.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Hello!
> 
> I just picked up my Z370 Hero X today (Still in need of a CPU and mem).
> 
> I saw that ASUS now includes a little bracket which you can mount a 40/50 mm fan on. I have a Fractal fan laying around (50mm) would it be necessary to use it when overclocking?
> 
> I will be delidding, under custom water and hopefully hit 5-5.2 ghz. I normally have a 120mm (spinning at 700 RPM or so) fan just for blowing on the VRMs, but that was on the hotter X299 and X99.


I hooked mine up ("Gelid 5" fan). Any directed airflow over the VRM has got to be a good thing.


----------



## corbosman

I have an Asus Prime Z370-A, and am wondering if you can have a single GPU in x16_2? In the bios it says it's x8 instead of x16 so I fear this is not possible? Due to the way my waterloop runs I was hoping to use slot2 instead of slot1.

Thanks,

Cor


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *corbosman*
> 
> I have an Asus Prime Z370-A, and am wondering if you can have a single GPU in x16_2? In the bios it says it's x8 instead of x16 so I fear this is not possible? Due to the way my waterloop runs I was hoping to use slot2 instead of slot1.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Cor


Says in the manual that the second slot is 16x pci-E 3.0. So it should be good to go. But it depends if you have other pci cards in other slots that drops the 16x slot to 8x.

For reference 8x pci-3.0 won't be a problem, lose less than 1% performance. I can understand you would want the slot running 16x for the sake of it.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Says in the manual that the second slot is 16x pci-E 3.0. So it should be good to go. But it depends if you have other pci cards in other slots that drops the 16x slot to 8x.
> 
> For reference 8x pci-3.0 won't be a problem, lose less than 1% performance. I can understand you would want the slot running 16x for the sake of it.


PCI x16_2 is only wired x8



@[email protected] is it possible to have this block diagram for the Formula / Code ?


----------



## corbosman

They should put that page in the manual. Imo the asus manual is very unclear about the slots. It says they recommend to use slot1, but because both are x16 slots I figured they'd both be able to do x16.

Anyways, didnt realise it made almost no difference so I think im just going to leave it. Thanks guys.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *corbosman*
> 
> They should put that page in the manual. Imo the asus manual is very unclear about the slots. It says they recommend to use slot1, but because both are x16 slots I figured they'd both be able to do x16.
> 
> Anyways, didnt realise it made almost no difference so I think im just going to leave it. Thanks guys.




Yep, shows 16x.

On my board apex X manual pic, the second slot shows 4x hard wired, third slot x8.


----------



## corbosman

Yeah that's the page i used to decide to put my card in slot2. But with the waterloop already made i dont think im moving it to slot1. Too much hassle moving hard pipes for very little gain.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, shows 16x.
> 
> On my board apex X manual pic, the second slot shows 4x hard wired, third slot x8.


This is why the manual is misleading. The x16 here is because it is the size of a x16. Doesn't necessarily mean it is wired x16.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *corbosman*
> 
> Yeah that's the page i used to decide to put my card in slot2. But with the waterloop already made i dont think im moving it to slot1. Too much hassle moving hard pipes for very little gain.


If you want to know if it's 16x for sure, see if the gold teeth go all the way across the slot.


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah, it looks to be a physical x16, electrical x8. The e-manual is pretty clear about that. only slot 1 is x16


----------



## corbosman

That's the ROG Maximus manual. If you look at the Prime z370-a manual it doesnt say this. Look a few posts up for the same picture from that manual. (edit: never mind I misunderstood..)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *corbosman*
> 
> That's the ROG Maximus manual. If you look at the Prime z370-a manual it doesnt say this. Look a few posts up for the same picture from that manual. (edit: never mind I misunderstood..)


no - you are right. I was posting the APEX manual. It has no chance of x16 in any slot but the first/top physical x16 slot.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> no - you are right. I was posting the APEX manual. It has no chance of x16 in any slot but the first/top physical x16 slot.


Guess who just joined the club.
Ordered my 8700k just now, went with the basic Strix-F, I know mid range board again


----------



## ChaosAD

Yesterday I received my new psu and ram kit. I still wait for mobo (hero x), 8700k and new ssd. They are due to the end of the week. Sold my old setup and it's the second week with no pc.


----------



## chibi

Hey guys, would you recommend waiting on an out of stock kit? Or go with one bin lower?

Newegg.ca - 4400/C19 OOS
Newegg.ca - 4266/C19 In Stock

Preferably, I'd order the black:black 4400/C19 kit, but chat support has no idea when it'll come back in stock. Don't really want to _settle_ with the 4266/C19 kit, but I want a working computer.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Guess who just joined the club.
> Ordered my 8700k just now, went with the basic Strix-F, I know mid range board again


you are...


----------



## Scotty99

Strix-f owners, what is your vcore at stock and asus mce?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Strix-f owners, what is your vcore at stock and asus mce?


I'll let you know when mine turns up tomorrow.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I'll let you know when mine turns up tomorrow.


You switching as well..?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> You switching as well..?


Yep I am...
Ordered a 8700k and Strix-F, should be her tomorrow....


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Yep I am...
> Ordered a 8700k and Strix-F, should be her tomorrow....


Lucky!

My 8700K is not here until the 20th or so... No in stock all over (our little) country.

Got the mobo installed. RAM (G.skill 4266 CL19, second-hand) coolant and ZMT tubing is on its way.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Lucky!
> 
> My 8700K is not here until the 20th or so... No in stock all over (our little) country.
> 
> Got the mobo installed. RAM (G.skill 4266 CL19, second-hand) coolant and ZMT tubing is on its way.


We've got heaps of stock in Australia now, at one point there was nothing for weeks.

I went with the Strix-F for now, they fixed the LLC bug so it shouldn't be a problem getting 5Ghz out of the 8700k (depending on the silicon).
Got a guy who's going to delid it for me in the new year, so that will help.

Sold the x299 setup, it was fun to play with now just going for the daily workhorse and well the 8700k is better for gaming.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> We've got heaps of stock in Australia now, at one point there was nothing for weeks.
> 
> I went with the Strix-F for now, they fixed the LLC bug so it shouldn't be a problem getting 5Ghz out of the 8700k (depending on the silicon).
> Got a guy who's going to delid it for me in the new year, so that will help.
> 
> Sold the x299 setup, it was fun to play with now just *going for the daily workhorse and well the 8700k is better for gaming.*


hard to ague against that. the 8700K abd z370 platform is really quick.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Yeah. I bought a 5.4 ghz 8700K. Seems to do 5.0 ghz at 1.220V. Won't know until it's here tho. Last owner runs a local PC store. So it should be legit.

Also bougt a kit of G.skill 2x8GB 4266 CL19 second-hand as well.

CPU was a bit on the pricey side, but ram was at a good price.

So hopefully it will be awesome. Using a 1080Ti which is a decent clocker.

CPU is re-lidded and everything is under custom water. Now I'm broke.









The upgrade costed me around 200 usd due to the increased CPU price. So not too shabby.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> hard to ague against that. the 8700K abd z370 platform is really quick.


I was reading over at the z370 vrm thread that the Strx-F would be no good for a delidded CPU because of it's VRM's.
Now you know me I don't go for huge overclocks, was looking at 4.9Ghz - 5Ghz, surely it'd be fine for that, a lot of reviewers are getting it on the Strix-F...


----------



## hdtvnut

I'll probably be ordering a build list based on a 8700K/Maximus X Hero soon. I read different things about ram. Is there a downside to ordering overspeed ram like 4000's, aside from expense? Can the cpu/board make use of this speed, or is it too much heat stress on the controller section? New at OC - thanks.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I was reading over at the z370 vrm thread that the Strx-F would be no good for a delidded CPU because of it's VRM's.
> Now you know me I don't go for huge overclocks, was looking at 4.9Ghz - 5Ghz, surely it'd be fine for that, a lot of reviewers are getting it on the Strix-F...


you just need to get some directed air flow on the VRMs. "Problem" solved. What thread are you seeing the VRMs can;t support a delid due to heat?


----------



## Scotty99

From everything ive read strix are fine in terms of vrm temps, only board $150 or above ive heard you should steer clear of is ultra gaming from gigabyte


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you just need to get some directed air flow on the VRMs. "Problem" solved. What thread are you seeing the VRMs can;t support a delid due to heat?


Its was early on in the z370 vrm thread.
VRM cooling is a non issue, if I can keep the x299 TUF's vrm between 60c and 65c depending on the stress test I'm sure it'll be easy for the z370 Stix-F without that stupid platic armour covering the vrm's like the TUF lol

Wasn't too worried the x299 TUF proved to be a solid board even with the x299 vrm conspiracy lol


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Its was early on in the z370 vrm thread.
> VRM cooling is a non issue, if I can keep the x299 TUF's vrm between 60c and 65c depending on the stress test I'm sure it'll be easy for the z370 Stix-F without that stupid platic armour covering the vrm's like the TUF lol
> 
> Wasn't too worried the x299 TUF proved to be a solid board even with the x299 vrm conspiracy lol


interesting.. i'm looking forward to your opinion on going from x299 (7820?) to the 8700K. Why not get the APEX?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> interesting.. i'm looking forward to your opinion on going from x299 (7820?) to the 8700K. Why not get the APEX?


Can't get my hands on one here yet? Hence the cheaper board for now, upgrade when I can get my hands on something worthwhile..

Have to build the kids a new machine for school next year was going to give them the Stix stick in a 8600k pickup the Apex or equivalent for myself..lol

Yeah had the 7820x, what I've noticed from the 7820x to my wife's 7700k/Hero things open quicker, it boots quicker just everyday use is quicker.
Video encoding, etc is slower of cause.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Can't get my hands on one here yet? Hence the cheaper board for now, upgrade when I can get my hands on something worthwhile..
> 
> Have to build the kids a new machine for school next year was going to give them the Stix stick in a 8600k pickup the Apex or equivalent for myself..lol
> 
> Yeah had the 7820x, what I've noticed from the 7820x to my wife's *7700k/Hero things open quicker, it boots quicker just everyday use is quicker.*
> Video encoding, etc is slower of cause.


oh... you're gonna like the z370.8700K combination.


----------



## Gunslinger.

Is there a TurboVcore for Z370 Apex X?

I don't see a dedicated thread up at the usual XOC forums for this board.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> oh... you're gonna like the z370.8700K combination.


I'm reusing my ram and Samsung 960 from the x299.
I know it's only 3200Mhz Vengeance but ram is still expensive at the moment so will probably do the swap with the kids build...lol


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gunslinger.*
> 
> Is there a TurboVcore for Z370 Apex X?
> 
> I don't see a dedicated thread up at the usual XOC forums for this board.


version 1.01.13 works.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

And I'll be in business soon


----------



## schoolofmonkey

@Jpmboy

And I'm up.

I loaded optimal defaults and this is what I got with a Cinebench run.


----------



## tknight

Monkey - What is your vcore ? Can you show the motherboard section in Hwinfo, so we can see your actual voltages.


----------



## Scotty99

The strix f pushes volts pretty high at stock, even with mce off its over 1.3v lol.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Monkey - What is your vcore ? Can you show the motherboard section in Hwinfo, so we can see your actual voltages.


Yeah will do, gad to reinstall Windows after that run so will do it for you soon.
Posting on my phone...

Update:
Now for some reason when I went and loaded optimal defaults again it lowered the clocks to 4.3Ghz all core, so the voltage is lower.
But this is default "optimized default" on BIOS 0430.



She's gonna need a delid, [email protected] (rough dirty oc) hit 89c under a H115i...

Update 2:
Been playing around a little more.
The 8700k isn't delidded yet so it's a little toasty, I can manage [email protected] with a CPU package of 89c.
Delid will be happening in January, got a local guy going to do it for me.

I've been working with LLC 6, anything lower introduces too much vdroop.
For 1.31v in BIOS I end up with 1.29v idle and 1.28v under load.

Here's hwinfo64 after I run Realbench 2.44 (non AVX in that version).


----------



## apw63

Just placed my order for Maximus x formula at Newegg. They have them is stock.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Yeah will do, gad to reinstall Windows after that run so will do it for you soon.
> Posting on my phone...
> 
> Update:
> Now for some reason when I went and loaded optimal defaults again it lowered the clocks to 4.3Ghz all core, so the voltage is lower.
> But this is default "optimized default" on BIOS 0430.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She's gonna need a delid, [email protected] (rough dirty oc) hit 89c under a H115i...
> 
> Update 2:
> Been playing around a little more.
> The 8700k isn't delidded yet so it's a little toasty, I can manage [email protected] with a CPU package of 89c.
> Delid will be happening in January, got a local guy going to do it for me.
> 
> I've been working with LLC 6, anything lower introduces too much vdroop.
> For 1.31v in BIOS I end up with 1.29v idle and 1.28v under load.
> 
> Here's hwinfo64 after I run Realbench 2.44 (non AVX in that version).
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


stick with manual vcore until you sort things out. And... vdroop, i would not eliminate it with LLC at this point. You should be able to allow at least 20mV droop.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> stick with manual vcore until you sort things out. And... vdroop, i would not eliminate it with LLC at this point. You should be able to allow at least 20mV droop.


Yeah I've been using manual voltages, I'm using a AVX offset of 4, I'm guessing that's the norm for going over the default 4.7Ghz.
What I found is with the Strix 1.3v produces 1.25v because of vdroop (LLC 6), 1.31v I get 1.296v, LLC 7 I get a overshot.

I'll have more of a play today.

On another note, holy cow is this thing snappy just using the OS and apps, I'm even getting proper speeds on my NVME drive, with the 7820x I was getting 3010MB/s, now it's 3298MB/s, right on it's rated speed.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya my pc is also ridiculously snappy even at stock, this 960 evo tho im sure has a lot to do with that lol.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya my pc is also ridiculously snappy even at stock, this 960 evo tho im sure has a lot to do with that lol.


Same NVME drive as me, got a 500GB SSD for games...
Heck even browsing network drives is quicker.

It surprises me that the HEDT doesn't feel the same way, and the question I ask is why...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Same NVME drive as me, got a 500GB SSD for games...
> Heck even browsing network drives is quicker.
> 
> It surprises me that the HEDT doesn't feel the same way, and the question I ask is why...


\

Yeah - the high core count processors (tho remember when a 6c12t HEDT was high core count?) are quite snappy too, just that the z370 platform is _really_ quick. IDK why, but with the exception of the 7740K, the 8700K is teets.









I'd stick with LLC 6 and raise idle vcore if needed. I usually go with adaptive, but thus far manual override and c-states has been a better configuration for me. Let's see how things develop with up-coming bios updates.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> \
> 
> Yeah - the high core count processors (tho remember when a 6c12t HEDT was high core count?) are quite snappy too, just that the z370 platform is _really_ quick. IDK why, but with the exception of the 7740K, the 8700K is teets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd stick with LLC 6 and raise idle vcore if needed. I usually go with adaptive, but thus far manual override and c-states has been a better configuration for me. Let's see how things develop with up-coming bios updates.


Do you have your c-states disabled or enabled, I wasn't sure, I had mine disabled on the x299 until I found the stable overclock.
I've found I can get lower voltages using manual over adaptive or offset, IDK why, so I've just stuck to manual.

Just got back from my morning walk (lost 49kgs/108 pounds







), so now I can play around with it ..


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I've found I can get lower voltages using manual over adaptive or offset, IDK why, so I've just stuck to manual.


The default vid for the core speed you entered must have been higher than the adaptive voltage you were trying to set. Setting the manual voltage bypasses the vid, thus the lower voltage.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Just got back from my morning walk (*lost 49kgs/108 pounds*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ), so now I can play around with it ..


Wow, must have been around the entire island!









Following up to my question asked earlier, does anyone know if going past a certain mem frequency on Coffee Lake requires adjustment to the bclk? I think it was anything over 4200 on Kaby Lake required bclk. Does that still hold true for Coffee Lake?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> The default vid for the core speed you entered must have been higher than the adaptive voltage you were trying to set. Setting the manual voltage bypasses the vid, thus the lower voltage.


Yeah I know that, my 7820x had a stupidly high vid, so offset or manual was the only way to bring down the voltages








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Wow, must have been around the entire island!


Twice man, now I need to find another island to walk around, one that's bigger, any suggestions









Oh and it seems the Strix-F doesn't have Adative:


Here'e all my Cinebench scores from the last few CPU's I've own.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Do you have your c-states disabled or enabled, I wasn't sure, I had mine disabled on the x299 until I found the stable overclock.
> I've found I can get lower voltages using manual over adaptive or offset, IDK why, so I've just stuck to manual.
> 
> Just got back from my morning walk (lost 49kgs/108 pounds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ), so now I can play around with it ..


I have all c-states enabled right now. 5.3/4.8 with 1.35V vcore, LLC 5 (droop to 1.328 under IBT)\
And congrats on the healthy move! Keep at it!







\
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> The default vid for the core speed you entered must have been higher than the adaptive voltage you were trying to set. Setting the manual voltage bypasses the vid, thus the lower voltage.
> Wow, must have been around the entire island!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Following up to my question asked earlier, does anyone know if going past a certain mem frequency on Coffee Lake requires adjustment to the bclk? I think it was anything over 4200 on Kaby Lake required bclk. Does that still hold true for Coffee Lake?


above 4266 will need a bclk assist.


----------



## Scotty99

So when my cooler comes tomorrow what is the least amount of stuff i have to tweak in the bios, i havent OC'd since sandy. Offset volts and multiplier enough for 4.8-4.9? (no delid yet)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Yeah I know that, my 7820x had a stupidly high vid, so offset or manual was the only way to bring down the voltages
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Twice man, now I need to find another island to walk around, one that's bigger, any suggestions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Oh and it seems the Strix-F doesn't have Adative:*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here'e all my Cinebench scores from the last few CPU's I've own.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


\
set CPu SVID to auto or enabled to see Adaptive


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So when my cooler comes tomorrow what is the least amount of stuff i have to tweak in the bios, i havent OC'd since sandy. Offset volts and multiplier enough for 4.8-4.9? (no delid yet)


here's some bios screenshots for manual and adaptive for general guidance. Your multipliers and voltages will vary. AND the vccio/VSA settings are only for 4266c17 on the ram. anything below 4000 is 1.175-1.2V on both. PLL bandwidth is something you do not need ot adjust. (this is set to run lower than default)









manual.zip 1344k .zip file


adaptive.zip 2007k .zip file


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> above 4266 will need a bclk assist.


Thanks JP! Looking forward to delidding this 8700K and pushing the memory further!


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> [/SPOILER]\
> set CPu SVID to auto or enabled to see Adaptive


Duh, I should of remembered that









I dialed in the 4.9Ghz as low as I can go on manual (1.296v), still hitting 90c, so I backed it off to [email protected] until the delid, it only maxed out at 86c under Realbench 2.44, also set the AVX offset to 1.

I think I might be sticking with manual though, 1.36v for 4.8Ghz using adaptive due to the VID..oh well....


----------



## Scotty99

Out of curiousity, how does asus ai suite do? I know they put millions into that software and it uses adaptive voltages, i also bet they limited volts to 1.3 or less. I may give it a shot tomorrow since i have it on my PC for the driver check utility.

Wait you are hitting 90c at 1.296v with a 280mm radiator? I knew these things were hot but holy crap lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Out of curiousity, how does asus ai suite do? I know they put millions into that software and it uses adaptive voltages, i also bet they limited volts to 1.3 or less. I may give it a shot tomorrow since i have it on my PC for the driver check utility.
> 
> Wait you are hitting 90c at 1.296v with a 280mm radiator? I knew these things were hot but holy crap lol.


before using ai suite to OC, get to know your cpu via bios.


----------



## Scotty99

Was more of a suggestion for schoolofmonkey, maybe ai suite would work for him as he is looking for adaptive but needs to stay under 1.3 to avoid throttling, the AI suite might pull that off nicely.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Was more of a suggestion for schoolofmonkey, maybe ai suite would work for him as he is looking for adaptive but needs to stay under 1.3 to avoid throttling, the AI suite might pull that off nicely.


yeah - that all depends on the VID. Can;t run adaptive below the VID for a given frequency. Sometimes a neg offset with adaptive turbo voltage can work, but idle stability may be a problem.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Was more of a suggestion for schoolofmonkey, maybe ai suite would work for him as he is looking for adaptive but needs to stay under 1.3 to avoid throttling, the AI suite might pull that off nicely.


Nah, JP knows I do it all manually, like he says get to know your BIOS.

Doing anything with VID enabled or Auto (Adaptive or Manual) on the Strix-F leads to stupidly high voltages, on manual I had it set to 1.28v (1.264v Windows) the cpu's VID was reading 1.42v in HWinfo64








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - that all depends on the VID. Can;t run adaptive below the VID for a given frequency. Sometimes a neg offset with adaptive turbo voltage can work, but idle stability may be a problem.


This is what I found on the 7820x when using negative offsets, idle would be unstable before load voltages were.


----------



## Scotty99

I just know for z170 there was a 1.3v limit on the software, not sure about z270 or now.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Nah, JP knows I do it all manually, like he says get to know your BIOS.
> 
> Doing anything with VID enabled or Auto (Adaptive or Manual) on the Strix-F leads to stupidly high voltages, on manual I had it set to 1.28v (1.264v Windows) the cpu's VID was reading 1.42v in HWinfo64
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is what I found on the 7820x when using negative offsets, idle would be unstable before load voltages were.


Oh for sure, was just an idea if you were bored. Ive heard horror stories from ai suite but ive also had people say it did a better job than they could ever manage with manual tweaking.

And ya this board is weird with voltages, i have a bone stock up to date bios with only xmp enabled and asus mce disabled. It still goes to 1.328v at those settings, like really asus lol.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Oh for sure, was just an idea if you were bored. Ive heard horror stories from ai suite but ive also had people say it did a better job than they could ever manage with manual tweaking.
> 
> And ya this board is weird with voltages, i have a bone stock up to date bios with only xmp enabled and asus mce disabled. It still goes to 1.328v at those settings, like really asus lol.


Tried it once, give me old school any day.









See I'm the Guinea Pig for mid ranged boards around here, from my 5820k all the way up to my 7820x.
But at least I can report back for the budget minded people..

Hey the Strix-F seems to be a fine board for the price, you just need to learn to work around it's umm quirks.









This is the voltages with VID enabled, Adaptive turbo set to 1.28v:


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Tried it once, give me old school any day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See I'm the Guinea Pig for mid ranged boards around here, from my 5820k all the way up to my 7820x.
> But at least I can report back for the budget minded people..
> 
> Hey the Strix-F seems to be a fine board for the price, you just need to learn to work around it's umm quirks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the voltages with VID enabled, Adaptive turbo set to 1.28v:


VID is the request.. what vcore is the board delivering as adaptive vcore?


----------



## Scotty99

My strix-f requests 1.442 with actual vcore spikes of 1.392 (seems to be 1.296-1.32v under load) at bone stock settings with only xmp enabled. This board is goofy as all hell lol.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> VID is the request.. what vcore is the board delivering as adaptive vcore?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> My strix-f requests 1.442 with actual vcore spikes of 1.392 (seems to be 1.296-1.32v under load) at bone stock settings with only xmp enabled. This board is goofy as all hell lol.


Same voltages here.
Don't try to run Cinebench 92c instantly even with a adaptive offset at 4.8Ghz.

Lock it down to manual, disable vid and it behaves as it should, LLC 6 gives 20mv vdroop.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya looks like manual is the way to go until asus pops out another bios. Have you tried stock bios settings but with asus MCE enabled to see where it puts volts at yet? That is the 4.7 all core turbo.

Edit, how about a negative offset? Or would that contribute to idle stability issues.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya looks like manual is the way to go until asus pops out another bios. Have you tried stock bios settings but with asus MCE enabled to see where it puts volts at yet? That is the 4.7 all core turbo.
> 
> Edit, how about a negative offset? Or would that contribute to idle stability issues.


I'm getting the same vcore fluctuation with mce as I was with adaptive, 1.369v - 1.415v for 4.7Ghz..

Adaptive offset just doesn't work at all, I set a negative adaptive offset of 0.100v and it didn't make any difference, so I tried 0.200v, no change, still sitting in the 1.3v - 1.4v range.
I think on the Strix-F we're limited to manual or straight offset, adaptive is just broke because of the VID.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *apw63*
> 
> Just placed my order for Maximus x formula at Newegg. They have them is stock.


Enjoy Im loving mine, just a tip if you are watercooling the VRM block remove the EK badge as it sits too close to the fitting hole and won't allow a fitting to sit flush.


----------



## apw63

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Enjoy Im loving mine, just a tip if you are watercooling the VRM block remove the EK badge as it sits too close to the fitting hole and won't allow a fitting to sit flush.


Thank you, i'll Be water cooling the VRM. +rep


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> here's some bios screenshots for manual and adaptive for general guidance. Your multipliers and voltages will vary. AND the vccio/VSA settings are only for 4266c17 on the ram. anything below 4000 is 1.175-1.2V on both. PLL bandwidth is something you do not need ot adjust. (this is set to run lower than default)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manual.zip 1344k .zip file
> 
> 
> adaptive.zip 2007k .zip file


JP, Long duration package power limit, why 300 instead of max?


----------



## kcuestag

Anyone got a link for ASUS Aura software for the Maximus X Hero?

Can't seem to find it on their Driver & Utility page on ASUS' website, it's driving me nuts...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> JP, Long duration package power limit, why 300 instead of max?


eh... at 5.2, it's not gonna pull even near 300 and never had an OCP yet... on this rig








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kcuestag*
> 
> Anyone got a link for ASUS Aura software for the Maximus X Hero?
> 
> Can't seem to find it on their Driver & Utility page on ASUS' website, it's driving me nuts...


https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/
"see all" under utilities


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kcuestag*
> 
> Anyone got a link for ASUS Aura software for the Maximus X Hero?
> 
> Can't seem to find it on their Driver & Utility page on ASUS' website, it's driving me nuts...


Qué tal compañero









Go to this link:

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/

Choose your OS, under Utilities you should see Version 3.00.01 of AI Suite and just below that a Show all button. Press it and it will deploy more utilities, among which you will find Aura software.


----------



## kcuestag

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> well.. at 5.2, it's not gonna pull even near 300 and never had an OCP yet... on this rig
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/
> "see all" under utilities


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> Qué tal compañero
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Go to this link:
> 
> https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/
> 
> Choose your OS, under Utilities you should see Version 3.00.01 of AI Suite and just below that a Show all button. Press it and it will deploy more utilities, among which you will find Aura software.


I was missing that "Show all button", damn it.









Thank you guys!


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> here's some bios screenshots for manual and adaptive for general guidance. Your multipliers and voltages will vary. AND the vccio/VSA settings are only for 4266c17 on the ram. anything below 4000 is 1.175-1.2V on both. PLL bandwidth is something you do not need ot adjust. (this is set to run lower than default)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manual.zip 1344k .zip file
> 
> 
> adaptive.zip 2007k .zip file


Wow - I see some new features in this BIOS that are unknown to me coming from an Asus X99 Deluxe II. May I ask where I can find information about what these do?

SVID Behavior
DRAM Odd Ratio Mode
Ring Down Bin
BLCK Aware Adaptive Voltage
Realtime Memory Timing

I also noticed your BIOS has "CPU VRM Thermal Control" where as in a post by Chibi (for an Apex?), there is no such control.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1640168/asus-z370-motherboard-series-official-support-thread/140_20#post_26458259

I am about ready to purchase the Hero-WIFI. I have already downloaded and read the manual, but it does not go into much detail about the BIOS. Asus used to publish BIOS manuals that were much more detailed, but I have not been able to find one for Z70 boards. Is there such a thing?


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Wow - I see some new features in this BIOS that are unknown to me coming from an Asus X99 Deluxe II. May I ask where I can find information about what these do?
> 
> SVID Behavior
> DRAM Odd Ratio Mode
> Ring Down Bin
> BLCK Aware Adaptive Voltage
> Realtime Memory Timing
> 
> I also noticed your BIOS has "CPU VRM Thermal Control" where as in a post by Chibi (for an Apex?), there is no such control.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1640168/asus-z370-motherboard-series-official-support-thread/140_20#post_26458259
> 
> I am about ready to purchase the Hero-WIFI. I have already downloaded and read the manual, but it does not go into much detail about the BIOS. Asus used to publish BIOS manuals that were much more detailed, but I have not been able to find one for Z70 boards. Is there such a thing?


Most likely due to different BIOS revisions. My Apex is on the 0802 BIOS, can't say for sure which BIOS JP is on.

Regarding the Ring Down Bin, I suspect the default behaviour when set to Auto is enabled for the 0802 BIOS. @Praz mentioned to disable Ring Down Bin, or set min/max cache to the same values to prevent downclocking. I suspect the difference between mine, and JP's BIOS revision is why JP's Cache frequency does not downclock when under load.

I'll do further testing once more components of my waterloop arrives. Right now my rig is out of commission until mid next week.


----------



## reset1101

Definitely, the Maximus X Hero BIOS needs a good polish. Until today, I had my 8700k at 4,5ghz on all cores and manual voltage of 1.1v on the core. Has been perfectly stable with DC and demanding games for weeks.

Just for fun, I started to play with OC a little bit today. Bumped the clock to 4,6ghz, voltage to 1.15v, booted into Windows and the 6 cores at 4,6ghz all the time. Good.

Bumped the clock to 4,7ghz, voltage to 1.2v and even with BOINC client opened and all the cores at 100%, speed went up and down from 4,3 to 4,7 on all cores at the same time, changing every like 2 seconds. Changing constantly. As weird as it sounds. I have rebooted several times, and behaviour was the same.

Went back to the 4,6ghz settings mentioned before, everything is fine and normal again. Cant understand whats going on. If im doing something wrong please tell me. But Ive just changed CPU clockspeed and core voltage set as manual. And just 100mhz and a bit of voltage shouldnt make my CPU go mad xD


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Most likely due to different BIOS revisions. My Apex is on the 0802 BIOS, can't say for sure which BIOS JP is on.
> 
> Regarding the Ring Down Bin, I suspect the default behaviour when set to Auto is enabled for the 0802 BIOS. @Praz mentioned to disable Ring Down Bin, or set min/max cache to the same values to prevent downclocking. I suspect the difference between mine, and JP's BIOS revision is why JP's Cache frequency does not downclock when under load.
> 
> I'll do further testing once more components of my waterloop arrives. Right now my rig is out of commission until mid next week.


not sure what's he's looking at there. I can;t find a "CPU VRM thermal control" in the 2 SS packs quoted.


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not sure what's he's looking at there. I can;t find a "CPU VRM thermal control" in the 2 SS packs quoted.


That setting was actually in my Screenshot package he linked, it's in my Extreme Tweaker\External Digi+ Power Control tab. Not familiar with what it does so I just left it on Auto.

Linked Post


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not sure what's he's looking at there. I can;t find a "CPU VRM thermal control" in the 2 SS packs quoted.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> That setting was actually in my Screenshot package he linked, it's in my Extreme Tweaker\External Digi+ Power Control tab. Not familiar with what it does so I just left it on Auto.
> 
> Linked Post


My bad. It was actually in Chibi's bios shot, as he clarified.



Sorry for confusion and still wondering what all of these wonderful new features are. Reading through tons of ROG forum threads now.

Thanks!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Most likely due to different BIOS revisions. My Apex is on the 0802 BIOS, can't say for sure which BIOS JP is on.
> 
> Regarding the Ring Down Bin, I suspect the default behaviour when set to Auto is enabled for the 0802 BIOS. @Praz mentioned to disable Ring Down Bin, or set min/max cache to the same values to prevent downclocking. I suspect the difference between mine, and JP's BIOS revision is why JP's Cache frequency does not downclock when under load.
> 
> I'll do further testing once more components of my waterloop arrives. Right now my rig is out of commission until mid next week.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> My bad. It was actually in Chibi's bios shot, as he clarified.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry for confusion and still wondering what all of these wonderful new features are. Reading through tons of ROG forum threads now.
> 
> Thanks!


ahh - I'm on bios 703. That must be the difference. I'll flash to 802 and verify.

so to your questions:

SVID Behavior -> affects additional turbo voltage vs VID. Use "Best Case"
DRAM Odd Ratio Mode -> well... allows for a broader selection of ram frequencies (freq dividers)
Ring Down Bin -> some guys have claimed you need to disable this to avoid cache down clocking. I've not see the issue with the auto setting and cache at 48 and 50.
BLCK Aware Adaptive Voltage > helps when using adaptive vcore when bclk oC - leave on Auto
Realtime Memory Timing -> kinda self explanatory.


----------



## Scotty99

Cooler is installed, aio header is same as cpu optional right? This deepcool only has a 3 pin so i guess it just runs at full speed at all times (pc silent, cant hear a peep)


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Cooler is installed, aio header is same as cpu optional right? This deepcool only has a 3 pin so i guess it just runs at full speed at all times (pc silent, cant hear a peep)


Don't you love where the Strix-F has it's AIO pump header









Played a bit more with voltages lastnight, we are really only stuck with manual, offset with VID off is just strange...


----------



## Menthol

AIO header is just that, it is 100% default best setting for AIO pumps


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Don't you love where the Strix-F has it's AIO pump header
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Played a bit more with voltages lastnight, we are really only stuck with manual, offset with VID off is just strange...


Hah thats why i used CPU opt instead, i think the location of the other aio header is for a GPU with a water cooler on it.

Im gonna play some games to see how much this cooler dropped temps from stock cooler (looks to be about 20-25c) then im gonna give ai suite a shot to see where it puts volts.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> That setting was actually in my Screenshot package he linked, it's in my Extreme Tweaker\External Digi+ Power Control tab. Not familiar with what it does so I just left it on Auto.
> 
> Linked Post


yep it's in 802 but not 703.


----------



## Scotty99

My god this CPU is hot lol. Playing destiny for 20 mins now two cores got to 75c, i need to set in a manual voltage for this pig.


----------



## Scotty99

So i just ran the asus auto tuning.

4.8ghz on 1 2 and 3 core loads, 4.7ghz on 4 5 and 6 core loads. 1.36v. I ran the CPU-z built in benchmark (which gets cpu's hotter than cinebench from my tests) and max i saw on one core was 86c.

Honestly not terrible, but i could do better manually. What im really curious is how well that software would do with a delidded cpu, thats next on the list









Edit:
Whats tj max on 8700k lol? I loaded up the 5ghz profile from bios and its stable, but hitting 92c, same 1.36v that auto tuning set.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ahh - I'm on bios 703. That must be the difference. I'll flash to 802 and verify.
> 
> so to your questions:
> 
> SVID Behavior -> affects additional turbo voltage vs VID. Use "Best Case"
> DRAM Odd Ratio Mode -> well... allows for a broader selection of ram frequencies (freq dividers)
> Ring Down Bin -> some guys have claimed you need to disable this to avoid cache down clocking. I've not see the issue with the auto setting and cache at 48 and 50.
> BLCK Aware Adaptive Voltage > helps when using adaptive vcore when bclk oC - leave on Auto
> Realtime Memory Timing -> kinda self explanatory.


Thanks Jpmboy. I have your 2 BIOS zip files and Chibi's, and have been grabbing snippets of advice from this forum and ROG. Your explanations are appreciated. Rep. I wish they would post a full BIOS manual like they have for my X99 BIOS on the support site.

I am buying the boring stuff first - power supply, AIO cooler, maybe RGB fans, but stalling on the CPU and MOBO. Once I pull the trigger on either one of those, I am committed to a Z-370 build. I'm stalling because I keep reading about how market prices are currently over Intel's suggested MSRP, and will likely drop in the near future when supply catches up, upcoming 8-core on Z-390, unknown upgrade path on Z-370, dual channel ram, crappy TIM, and limited PCIE lanes. I was planning to do an X299 build with a 7900x because I want Quad channel ram and 40 PCIE lanes. X299 gets expensive fast.

The 8700K keeps bouncing from $399 to $414 on Amazon, and going in and out of stock. I could buy a 7800X or even a BW-E 6850K (which I used to think about upgrading to from my 5820K) for that money. Then I read about how "snappy" the 8700K is, and I may not even put a GPU in. For my use, the IGPU is fine, though I do have 4 monitors to deal with. It's a crazy time to be CPU / platform shopping!


----------



## Scotty99

So found out another thing about strix-f, with latest bios (0430) "asus multicore enhancement" is actually intel defaults lol. 1.216v under load, does not go over 70c in a stress test with 800 rpm fans. So ya, thats backasswards.

Fan control also broken on strix-f. I have a fan curve setup to have the fans max at 75c but only go to 800 rpm anything below that. The max speed works, but every time i alt tab into a game the fans go to 1300 rpm for 2-3 seconds even tho my CPU never goes over 60c. Fun stuff lol.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Whats tj max on 8700k lol? I loaded up the 5ghz profile from bios and its stable, but hitting 92c, same 1.36v that auto tuning set.


I just did the same, it set the voltages to 1.43v on all cores for 5Ghz!!!!!
Didn't even bother to stress test it, I know what temps I'll see


----------



## Essenbe

I've seen voltages that range all over the spectrum, does anyone know the max SAFE voltage for the 8700K?


----------



## Yetyhunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> My god this CPU is hot lol. Playing destiny for 20 mins now two cores got to 75c, i need to set in a manual voltage for this pig.


The CPU itself is not hot. It's just the thermal dissipation from the die that is terrible. The heat is not transferred from the die to the Cpu cooler because of the poor Intel TIM.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So i just ran the asus auto tuning.
> 
> 4.8ghz on 1 2 and 3 core loads, 4.7ghz on 4 5 and 6 core loads. 1.36v. I ran the CPU-z built in benchmark (which gets cpu's hotter than cinebench from my tests) and max i saw on one core was 86c.
> 
> Honestly not terrible, but i could do better manually. What im really curious is how well that software would do with a delidded cpu, thats next on the list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit:
> *Whats tj max on 8700k* lol? I loaded up the 5ghz profile from bios and its stable, but hitting 92c, same 1.36v that auto tuning set.


100C


----------



## Scotty99

Technically i could run the 5ghz profile on non delidded cpu as i mostly game, cores dont go over 80c. Yet i need to send my video card back to newegg because of coil whine i might as well take my cpu out and send it to silicon lottery lol.

And @schoolofmonkey thats odd, my 5ghz profile is 1.36v, wonder how ours are different given same board and bios.


----------



## Jpmboy

Are you guys looking at two different things? vcore and VID?


----------



## Essenbe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Are you guys looking at two different things? vcore and VID?


Where can you find the VID? I have always used Core Temp to find it, but it won't show it any more on this 8700K chip.


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Essenbe*
> 
> Where can you find the VID? I have always used Core Temp to find it, but it won't show it any more on this 8700K chip.


HWiNFO64 will do it for you.

https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Are you guys looking at two different things? vcore and VID?


My vid is 1.4 something, vcore is 1.36 with 5.0ghz bios setting.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> My vid is 1.4 something, vcore is 1.36 with 5.0ghz bios setting.


Yeah - I have the same thing... VID is well over 1.4V for 5.2, but the chip is good with 1.360 manual override with droop to 1.328=1.344V with IBT, linX, p95 etc. This measures off the MB as 1.335-ish volts.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Yeah - I have the same thing... VID is well over 1.4V for 5.2, but the chip is good with 1.35 (droop to 1.328V with IBT, linX, p95 etc).


VID was super high (1.458v), vcore was around the same.
Still warm when not setting a AVX offset, even at 4.8Ghz, so I've just been setting the offset it to 4.7Ghz whatever clocks I'm playing with.
Will be a different story when I get delidded after Xmas...

Other than the quirks the Strix-F is ok when you learn to work around them, but I most defiantly going to pickup a z370 Code, Apex is out only 2 ram slots and I'm using my 32GB (4x8GB) kit from the x299 build..









Hey at least Asus included a VRM fan mount with the Strix-F, more than what come with the x299 TUF/Strix board...








I honestly didn't believe that sticking a fan on the VRM's would drop stress testing temps by 7-8c, I double tested and yeah it does, without active cooling [email protected] 91c, with 83-84cc, I checked the results like Santa checking his lists


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Testing 5.3 ghz at this 8700K at the moment. Only a light workflow (Folding Nacl).

Will either stick to 5.0 ghz at closer to 1.200V, or 5.3 ghz at closer to 1.400V..

The temps are so cool already, so no point in dropping the speed.

Does anyone have a good guide on OCing on Z370/ASUS (Hero X in my case)?

Thanks and cheers!


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Testing 5.3 ghz at this 8700K at the moment. Only a light workflow (Folding Nacl).
> 
> Will either stick to 5.0 ghz at closer to 1.200V, or 5.3 ghz at closer to 1.400V..
> 
> The temps are so cool already, so no point in dropping the speed.
> 
> Does anyone have a good guide on OCing on Z370/ASUS (Hero X in my case)?
> 
> Thanks and cheers!


Try this, the principle is the same








http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/


----------



## fleps

Hi guys

I´m not new to overclock but my experience is more with AsRock on Gen2 and Gen3 cpus, so i´m needing some help with my new 8700k + maximus X hero + gskill 3200 + EVGA CLC 280mm.

1) Is offset mode broken right now? I always preferred it over fixed mode but can´t figure out how it works on this motherboard, when I enable it there is only the offset field but not a turbo voltage field, so how this works? I noted Adaptive mode looks like the offset mode I´m used to, but couldn't get it to work as I wanted, the vcore goes way above the turbo + offset I'm setting, no idea why.

2) What is the expected voltage for a basic 5Ghz? I have see some review getting it with 1.28v but mine won't even boot and seems anything below 1.35 is unstable.

3) What are those dam VCCIO and SAV voltage? Do they increase CPU temps or only room for OC?

4) I have tried manual mode to achieve 5Ghz on all cores with AVX -2 using 1.35v, VCCIO 1.100, SAV 1.25 and followed the other settings you guys shared on those zip files, but the temperatures are crazy even with an AIO. The moment I start RealBench StressTest the temperatures go from 40 to 80C and under TWO minutes reach 91C and I stop it.

Any idea what´s going on here?

5) Is there any way (it can be with extra software, I don´t mind) to avoid the unnecessary 100% fan speed when the CPU is over some temperature? I have my AIO fans connected to both CPU fan readers and configured PW control on Bios setting the max duty to 40% and they work fine, but only until the CPU temp reaches 85C or something, then they go to 100% which is absurdly loud.

I appreciate if any help to any of the questions.

Thanks


----------



## Scotty99

So with xmp enabled i cannot get my 8700k to boost to 4.7ghz on one core with asus mce enabled or disabled, most i see the cores hit is 4.5 and maybe 4.6 on some days. I disable xmp and it boosts to 4.7 instantly.

Is this intended behavior or some bug? Obviously ill be overclocking when i get my chip delidded, but why isnt it boosting properly with xmp enabled?


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Hi guys
> 
> I´m not new to overclock but my experience is more with AsRock on Gen2 and Gen3 cpus, so i´m needing some help with my new 8700k + maximus X hero + gskill 3200 + EVGA CLC 280mm.
> 
> 1) Is offset mode broken right now? I always preferred it over fixed mode but can´t figure out how it works on this motherboard, when I enable it there is only the offset field but not a turbo voltage field, so how this works? I noted Adaptive mode looks like the offset mode I´m used to, but couldn't get it to work as I wanted, the vcore goes way above the turbo + offset I'm setting, no idea why.
> I always use adaptive on ASUS boards for daily use, look for KabyLake guide, very similar
> 
> 2) What is the expected voltage for a basic 5Ghz? I have see some review getting it with 1.28v but mine won't even boot and seems anything below 1.35 is unstable.
> The CPU capabilities vary wildly, I have 2 chips, one sounds like yours I run it at 4.7 for daily use, it is very fast at that speed an I like a quit system also
> 
> 3) What are those dam VCCIO and SAV voltage? Do they increase CPU temps or only room for OC?
> Use these to get high speed memory stable
> 
> 4) I have tried manual mode to achieve 5Ghz on all cores with AVX -2 using 1.35v, VCCIO 1.100, SAV 1.25 and followed the other settings you guys shared on those zip files, but the temperatures are crazy even with an AIO. The moment I start RealBench StressTest the temperatures go from 40 to 80C and under TWO minutes reach 91C and I stop it.
> That is normal with AIO and non delidded chip the temps skyrocket very fast
> 
> Any idea what´s going on here?
> 
> 5) Is there any way (it can be with extra software, I don´t mind) to avoid the unnecessary 100% fan speed when the CPU is over some temperature? I have my AIO fans connected to both CPU fan readers and configured PW control on Bios setting the max duty to 40% and they work fine, but only until the CPU temp reaches 85C or something, then they go to 100% which is absurdly loud.
> Delid is the best option
> 
> I appreciate if any help to any of the questions.
> 
> Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Hi guys
> 
> I´m not new to overclock but my experience is more with AsRock on Gen2 and Gen3 cpus, so i´m needing some help with my new 8700k + maximus X hero + gskill 3200 + EVGA CLC 280mm.
> 
> 1) Is offset mode broken right now? I always preferred it over fixed mode but can´t figure out how it works on this motherboard, when I enable it there is only the offset field but not a turbo voltage field, so how this works? I noted Adaptive mode looks like the offset mode I´m used to, but couldn't get it to work as I wanted, the vcore goes way above the turbo + offset I'm setting, no idea why.
> 
> 2) What is the expected voltage for a basic 5Ghz? I have see some review getting it with 1.28v but mine won't even boot and seems anything below 1.35 is unstable.
> 
> 3) What are those dam VCCIO and SAV voltage? Do they increase CPU temps or only room for OC?
> 
> 4) I have tried manual mode to achieve 5Ghz on all cores with AVX -2 using 1.35v, VCCIO 1.100, SAV 1.25 and followed the other settings you guys shared on those zip files, but the temperatures are crazy even with an AIO. The moment I start RealBench StressTest the temperatures go from 40 to 80C and under TWO minutes reach 91C and I stop it.
> 
> Any idea what´s going on here?
> 
> 5) Is there any way (it can be with extra software, I don´t mind) to avoid the unnecessary 100% fan speed when the CPU is over some temperature? I have my AIO fans connected to both CPU fan readers and configured PW control on Bios setting the max duty to 40% and they work fine, but only until the CPU temp reaches 85C or something, then they go to 100% which is absurdly loud.
> 
> I appreciate if any help to any of the questions.
> 
> Thanks


to add to Menthol's post. when using adaptive, you do not need to enter an offset. Leave this on Auto, then enter the voltage you want the chip to receive directly into the Additional Turbo Voltage field. Then:
Set LLC (load line calibration) to a middle value like 4 or 5
On the external power menu, set IA AC load line to 0.01, and IA DC load line to 0.01
Select SVID Behavior = "Best Case"

Adaptive cannot run at a voltage below the VID for any frequency - so if the CPU is stable at a voltage lower than the VID, it is best to use manual override and enable all c-states. The difference in idle power (watts) is only a few watts (like 5 or so).
It's alway best to figure out the voltage the chip needs for your OC using manuial override... then switch to Adaptive.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> to add to Menthol's post. when using adaptive, you do not need to enter an offset. Leave this on Auto, then enter the voltage you want the chip to receive directly into the Additional Turbo Voltage field. Then:
> Set LLC (load line calibration) to a middle value like 4 or 5
> On the external power menu, set IA AC load line to 0.01, and IA DC load line to 0.01
> Select SVID Behavior = "Best Case"
> 
> Adaptive cannot run at a voltage below the VID for any frequency - so if the CPU is stable at a voltage lower than the VID, it is best to use manual override and enable all c-states. The difference in idle power (watts) is only a few watts (like 5 or so).
> It's alway best to figure out the voltage the chip needs for your OC using manuial override... then switch to Adaptive.


Hey thanks for the reply.

So is IA AC/DC 0.01 or 1? I have seen mixed information about it, right now mines are 1. Or this is only for adaptive? (for now i'm staying on manual).

Thanks.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Hey thanks for the reply.
> 
> So is IA AC/DC 0.01 or 1? I have seen mixed information about it, right now mines are 1. Or this is only for adaptive? (for now i'm staying on manual).
> 
> Thanks.


Hello

0.01 and is irrelevant when using manual voltage mode.


----------



## fleps

Sooo

Testing 4.8Gz -1 AVX offset and Vcore 1.28 manual

AC/DC are at 1, LLC at 5,

While doing Prime 26.6 I'm getting mixed result with vcore
- CPU-Z says 1.264 under load, while in idle shows 1.28
- HWMonitor and HWiNFO shows fluctuation from 1.33-38

When doing Prime with AVX so the clock is at 4.7:

- CPU-Z stays at 1.264
- HWMonitor, HWinfo and Intel XTU show 1.40-43 !!!!

***??

Other settings:
SVID enabled
BCLK Aware Adaptive Voltage enabled
C states on default

*Edit*: ok, I just noted that those numbers are from CPU VID and not Vcore, Intel XTU got me because doesn't have other option


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Sooo
> 
> Testing 4.8Gz -1 AVX offset and Vcore 1.28 manual
> 
> AC/DC are at 1, LLC at 5,
> 
> While doing Prime 26.6 I'm getting mixed result with vcore
> - CPU-Z says 1.264 under load, while in idle shows 1.28
> - HWMonitor and HWiNFO shows fluctuation from 1.33-38
> 
> When doing Prime with AVX so the clock is at 4.7:
> 
> - CPU-Z stays at 1.264
> - HWMonitor, HWinfo and Intel XTU show 1.40-43 !!!!
> 
> ***??
> 
> Other settings:
> SVID enabled
> BCLK Aware Adaptive Voltage enabled
> C states on default


change ac/dc load lines to 0.01.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> change ac/dc load lines to 0.01.


I did, nothing changed on my results.

After an entire day reading and testing I think i'll just accept that after 3 years with a gold 3570K this time I got a bad chip.

It will not get stable even with [email protected], nothing above [email protected] will pass the 30min mark on Prime (blend), it will start trowing WEAH errors the second it goes above 87C (and the dam AIO fans go 100%, come on Asus...)

The odd thing is that under load the vcore is always lower than the idle/manual set. Go figure.

I will keep following the topic, maybe something new come up or a future bios update, but I guess I wont even try deliding this one, I may just sell it and try again.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> I did, nothing changed on my results.
> 
> After an entire day reading and testing I think i'll just accept that after 3 years with a gold 3570K this time I got a bad chip.
> 
> It will not get stable even with [email protected], nothing above [email protected] will pass the 30min mark on Prime (blend), it will start trowing WEAH errors the second it goes above 87C (and the dam AIO fans go 100%, come on Asus...)
> 
> The odd thing is that under load the vcore is always lower than the idle/manual set. Go figure.
> 
> I will keep following the topic, maybe something new come up or a future bios update, but I guess I wont even try deliding this one, I may just sell it and try again.


Which board are you using? On the Formula even with UEFI 0802 Adaptive voltage is broken, better than 0220 but still broken, try using LLC level 6.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Which board are you using? On the Formula even with UEFI 0802 Adaptive voltage is broken, better than 0220 but still broken, try using LLC level 6.


I'm on Maximus X Hero, with 0802. The latest results all on manual mode


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> I'm on Maximus X Hero, with 0802. The latest results all on manual mode


Cool, have you tried LLC 6?


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Cool, have you tried LLC 6?


I think I'm on LLC 5 now but the first tries at 5 and 4.9 ghz with 1.35/1.33 were at LLC6, not much of a difference.

I just completed a pass of 1h on Prime(Blend) with 4.7 @ 1.25v manual (1.23 on software readers under load), LLC5, short peak of 85C in 2 occasion during the 1h pass, average max was around 77/80.

This seems fine but then it's really odd that 4.8G can't get stable even on 1.34, so odd. I guess this chip is reaching it's thermal limits, maybe delid will help it out. Still unsure if I should delid or just sell it and try another one (I'll lose some money on this and they are not cheap here)

Meh, I may try more stuff tomorrow.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> I think I'm on LLC 5 now but the first tries at 5 and 4.9 ghz with 1.35/1.33 were at LLC6, not much of a difference.
> 
> I just completed a pass of 1h on Prime(Blend) with 4.7 @ 1.25v manual (1.23 on software readers under load), LLC5, short peak of 85C in 2 occasion during the 1h pass, average max was around 77/80.
> 
> This seems fine but then it's really odd that 4.8G can't get stable even on 1.34, so odd. I guess this chip is reaching it's thermal limits, maybe delid will help it out. Still unsure if I should delid or just sell it and try another one (I'll lose some money on this and they are not cheap here)
> 
> Meh, I may try more stuff tomorrow.


Fair enough, LLC 6 makes a big difference on my board, perhaps consider a delid.


----------



## Scotty99

So i just went through a day long ordeal with asus aura not working.

I tried all the standard stuff like reinstalling, removing old folders/registry files and removing cmos, when none of that worked i even reinstalled my OS (not a big deal only had two games installed) and not even that worked.

TLDR, make sure when you install aura you extract "setup" not "asus setup", yes that is what was the problem lol. Why are there two setup files in aura folder, and why is the larger one at the top the incorrect setup file? Ask guys at asus on that one.

Does not explain why aura messed up in the first place, but for anyone having a problem and needing to reinstall that was my story for the day.


----------



## Scotty99

Also the beta bios for z370-F (also tried that as a fix for aura lol) has 4.7ghz all core boost with *1.4+v*.

That is at *stock* settings, not even xmp activated. Mind boggling what the guys at asus are doing with z370.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> I did, nothing changed on my results.
> 
> After an entire day reading and testing I think i'll just accept that after 3 years with a gold 3570K this time I got a bad chip.
> 
> It will not get stable even with [email protected], nothing above [email protected] will pass the 30min mark on Prime (blend), it will start trowing WEAH errors the second it goes above 87C (and the dam AIO fans go 100%, come on Asus...)
> 
> *The odd thing is that under load the vcore is always lower than the idle/manual set. Go figure.*
> 
> I will keep following the topic, maybe something new come up or a future bios update, but I guess I wont even try deliding this one, I may just sell it and try again.


well, that's a good thing. you want vdroop.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Also the beta bios for z370-F (also tried that as a fix for aura lol) has 4.7ghz all core boost with *1.4+v*.
> 
> That is at *stock* settings, not even xmp activated. Mind boggling what the guys at asus are doing with z370.


just work with manual override for vcore. I'm not seeing any issues with manual and clocks at 5.2/4.8 (or higher).


----------



## fleps

Guys, seems that OC memory is a thing again now (on gen3 it was really not worth it) so I'm a little rusty on this.

What are the basic tips you can give me? I have a G.skill 3200 CL16 (2x8), discovered that it's not a good Smasung chip but rather a Hynix chip that runs 3200 16-18-18-38 2T 1.35v

Found a specific review on these chips and they where able to crank it to 3570Mhz with 1.45v while still keeping the same timings which sounds pretty good.

What's the best way of trying this w/o messing with my CPU OC? Disable XMP I imagine? Should I target 3600 with loose timings like 18-20-20-40 or better keep on the 3500ish on the same CL? Also, I don't need to mess with VCCSA/VCCIO while staying below 3600Mhz right?

(This is the review btw, mines are the RGB but is the same chip: https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7417/skill-trident-ddr4-3200-16gb-dual-channel-memory-kit-review/index.html)

Thanks


----------



## l Nuke l

Hey guys I have an asus maximus x apex coming in looking for some good case recommendations want to keep temps low across the board so good airflow is important. List of my other components in sig. Was thinking bout the phanteks p400 but heard it is no good with the h115i mounted in the front due to the front panel restricting airflow. Also open to using a test bench. Thanks!


----------



## l Nuke l

https://www.quietpcusa.com/Streacom-ST-BC1-Open-Benchtable is that site legit? Thinking of going with that test bench and this seems to be the only place to get it.


----------



## Jpmboy

yep - that's a very good bench table. Small and portable. There are less portable ones that make for a more "permanent" looking open rig, but the OBT is a fine choice.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yep - that's a very good bench table. Small and portable. There are less portable ones that make for a more "permanent" looking open rig, but the OBT is a fine choice.


Placed the order should be here by end of week. Can't wait!


----------



## hhuey5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Hey guys I have an asus maximus x apex coming in looking for some good case recommendations want to keep temps low across the board so good airflow is important. List of my other components in sig. Was thinking bout the phanteks p400 but heard it is no good with the h115i mounted in the front due to the front panel restricting airflow. Also open to using a test bench. Thanks!


Just make sure you got positive air flow over all the hot parts in the computer ie: cpu videocard hdd ssd m.2 u.2
the hot air will come out thru the holes in the case and your 2-3 exhaust fans on top (if you got room)

my 2 builds are Square Tower ie: Air540 and Case X9 (improvement over air540)
they take more room than your tower

checking google image on phanteks p400 ; there isnt much room for top exhaust while having front AIO
keep on looking at diff tower cases

another thing to keep in mind is having Case Air Filters on your case to catch the dust


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hhuey5*
> 
> Just make sure you got positive air flow over all the hot parts in the computer ie: cpu videocard hdd ssd m.2 u.2
> the hot air will come out thru the holes in the case and your 2-3 exhaust fans on top (if you got room)
> 
> my 2 builds are Square Tower ie: Air540 and Case X9 (improvement over air540)
> they take more room than your tower
> 
> checking google image on phanteks p400 ; there isnt much room for top exhaust while having front AIO
> keep on looking at diff tower cases
> 
> another thing to keep in mind is having Case Air Filters on your case to catch the dust


I decided to go with the open benchtable! Thanks!


----------



## hhuey5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> I decided to go with the open benchtable! Thanks!


not the wall mounted computer with tempered glass 

will you have household fan blowing on the parts?

well at least you wont have to worry about dust settling


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> https://www.quietpcusa.com/Streacom-ST-BC1-Open-Benchtable is that site legit? Thinking of going with that test bench and this seems to be the only place to get it.


Good choice! DimasTech is also revving up to relaunch in 2018. They should be receiving new V3's by end of month and are partnering with Modmymods to distribute in the US. I purchased an EasyXL from them recently and it's pretty good. I would have rather to get the V3 but couldn't wait that long









Canada Post, please let me heatkiller blocks through customs already. You've had them pending since the 6th...


----------



## l Nuke l

My Asus Maximus X Apex just arrived today and after inspecting the board i notice the small capacitor was slightly bent. Got it from amazon. Still waiting on my 8700k so i cant test the board. Should I return it?


----------



## [email protected]

Checking on my phone. Can't see a misaligned cap.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> My Asus Maximus X Apex just arrived today and after inspecting the board i notice the small capacitor was slightly bent. Got it from amazon. Still waiting on my 8700k so i cant test the board. Should I return it?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


are you talking about this one?


if yes, unless the wires under it are broken, the cap is fine. (it wil bend straight up easily if it bothers you.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> are you talking about this one?
> 
> 
> if yes, unless the wires under it are broken, the cap is fine. (it wil bend straight up easily if it bothers you.


yeah thats the one. cant really see the wires underneath it. Is that cap for the audio?


----------



## WetMacula

Just took shipment of a Z370 Taichi. Looks like the video card needs to run in the top slot by itself to operate at x16. Think the manual says 16, 8 x 8, or 8 x 4 x 4 if running 1, 2, or 3 cards. I have (1) 1080ti and a sound card. The (2) PCIE x1 slots are above and below the top x16 slot (probably to make room for the 3rd M.2. Since the 1080ti eclipses the lower x1 slot, was hoping the sound card might squeeze between the video card and my D15 cooler but it looks too tight. Question is, if I run a sound card in the bottom x16 slot, will the video card drop down to 8x? Can anyone test for me before I open the motherboard?


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WetMacula*
> 
> Just took shipment of a Z370 Taichi. Looks like the video card needs to run in the top slot by itself to operate at x16. Think the manual says 16, 8 x 8, or 8 x 4 x 4 if running 1, 2, or 3 cards. I have (1) 1080ti and a sound card. The (2) PCIE x1 slots are above and below the top x16 slot (probably to make room for the 3rd M.2. Since the 1080ti eclipses the lower x1 slot, was hoping the sound card might squeeze between the video card and my D15 cooler but it looks too tight. Question is, if I run a sound card in the bottom x16 slot, will the video card drop down to 8x? Can anyone test for me before I open the motherboard?


Taichi is AsRock mother board =P

As rule for all MB's nowadays if you use any of the other PCI x16 (talking about the size here) the first one will work on x8.
The performance differences today are LOWER than 1% when playing on any resolution so I wouldn't really care about.

Anyway, here is the manual: http://asrock.pc.cdn.bitgravity.com/Manual/Z370%20Taichi.pdf


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Taichi is AsRock mother board =P


Hello

Yeah, wrong thread for this stuff.


----------



## scracy

A couple of things I have picked up about UEFI 0802 for Maximus X Formula VRM temperature sensor is not being monitored within the UEFI which means monitoring software cannot read VRM temperature, also adaptive voltage is slightly broken when system is under load voltage seems to drop significantly, doesn't appear to be an LLC issue as in manual volts it works fine.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I think my G.skill kit is defective..

Crashed with a sort of "non page error" which I guess is a mem causable BSOD..

Running this with 1.45V in order to not crash quick..



Settings that I did 5.2 ghz for a few hours of RB 2.56V will simply crash (5.2 ghz 1.329V)..


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Anyone seen this with Aura software install, it seems to introduce latency and is clearly seen on Benchmarks.

I first come across this with my x99 Strix, was hoping they'd fixed it by now.

The scores are run at 4.9Ghz, the ones above the line are with Aura not installed, the ones below are when it is, all the same clocks, not a big difference but I thought you'd guys might find it interesting.


----------



## LeZac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Anyone seen this with Aura software install, it seems to introduce latency and is clearly seen on Benchmarks.
> 
> I first come across this with my x99 Strix, was hoping they'd fixed it by now.
> 
> The scores are run at 4.9Ghz, the ones above the line are with Aura not installed, the ones below are when it is, all the same clocks, not a big difference but I thought you'd guys might find it interesting.


Interesting find. Will check this evening when I get home.

I had the feeling that at SOME point my scores went down without any clear reason to me. Might actually have been Aura installation.

Btw, did you keep your Strix board?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LeZac*
> 
> Interesting find. Will check this evening when I get home.
> 
> I had the feeling that at SOME point my scores went down without any clear reason to me. Might actually have been Aura installation.
> 
> Btw, did you keep your Strix board?


Yeah for now, can't afford to pick up another board until January anyway. (Thank you Xmas and 5 kids..lol).

I still need 1.344v for 4.9Ghz Prime95 Stable, dropped back to [email protected] because summer is here and it's hot.
Can't get the delid done till after xmas either









What I planned to do is get the delid done and see how it goes.

I'm finding if I turn on the VID it'll throw the "power limited exceeded" error and down clock, manual works perfectly.
Don't know if it's the board or the BIOS.


----------



## no1yak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> A couple of things I have picked up about UEFI 0802 for Maximus X Formula VRM temperature sensor is not being monitored within the UEFI which means monitoring software cannot read VRM temperature, also adaptive voltage is slightly broken when system is under load voltage seems to drop significantly, doesn't appear to be an LLC issue as in manual volts it works fine.


My Hero X doesn't monitor VRM temps either and the same with my Hero IX. Mentioned this on the ROG forum and it seems that I'm not the only one with this problem.


----------



## bloot

Hero X non-wifi version and no VRM temp sensor here either, neither on bios neither on hwinfo :S


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *no1yak*
> 
> My Hero X doesn't monitor VRM temps either and the same with my Hero IX. Mentioned this on the ROG forum and it seems that I'm not the only one with this problem.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> Hero X non-wifi version and no VRM temp sensor here either, neither on bios neither on hwinfo :S


Maybe somebody should P.M @[email protected] about this and the fact adaptive voltage is broken on Formula UEFI 0802


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Adaptive does not work, nor shows up on my Hero X..

But then again either the board, CPU or RAM is defective... To be stable I need to be at 3200 mhz Cl16-16-36-2T 1.400V...


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Adaptive does not work, nor shows up on my Hero X..
> 
> But then again either the board, CPU or RAM is defective... To be stable I need to be at 3200 mhz Cl16-16-36-2T 1.400V...


I agree with you on the adaptive not working correctly, it's the same on my Strix-F.
But I don't need that much voltage for my 3200Mhz 4x8Gb 16 18 18 36 1T kit


----------



## Rowethren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Adaptive does not work, nor shows up on my Hero X..
> 
> But then again either the board, CPU or RAM is defective... To be stable I need to be at 3200 mhz Cl16-16-36-2T 1.400V...


It should show up. Have you got SVID disabled?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rowethren*
> 
> It should show up. Have you got SVID disabled?


Wont show up without SVID enabled


----------



## Rowethren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Wont show up without SVID enabled


That is what I mean. If he has it disabled it would explain why he cant see it


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Adaptive does not work, nor shows up on my Hero X..
> 
> But then again either the board, CPU or RAM is defective... To be stable I need to be at 3200 mhz Cl16-16-36-2T 1.400V...


in order for adaptive vcore to show in the drop down menu, you must set cpu svid to auto or enabled. Adaptive is disabled when cpu svid is disabled (as it should be).

an as far as the Aura services affecting r15... well, it's an additional service running and uses a low fraction of cpu time


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> an as far as the Aura services affecting r15... well, it's an additional service running and uses a low fraction of cpu time


Yeah had this same talk back when I got my x99 Strix, it was more of a heads up for others.
Though I wasn't expecting it to effect scores so much..


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Yeah had this same talk back when I got my x99 Strix, it was more of a heads up for others.
> Though I wasn't expecting it to effect scores so much..


yeah - simply disabling the effects in bios stil lloads the background service. so you can disable it when needed rather than uninstall the software. (as you would any service).
it's called "lighting service". And if you are using "wave" or anything but static, it hits the cpu more often.


----------



## Bluecow003

Just booted up my 8700k build with the Asus Maximus Code last night (components in signature). Everything looked good, but holy cow have BIOS's changed since I last built a computer. This is also my first ROG motherboard. My last build was a Nehalem build in 2009 (also in signature). Just the idea of being able to use a mouse to navigate the BIOS was new to me, ha! I managed to get my SATA RAID arrays setup and Windows installed on the M.2 drive. I also got the XMP profile loaded for my ram correctly. Now I have to figure out everything else in the BIOS to overclock this thing. Apart from overclocking the CPU, is there a quick cheat sheet of other things that should be tweaked in the BIOS for better performance or anything else I should be aware of with this?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bluecow003*
> 
> Just booted up my 8700k build with the Asus Maximus Code last night (components in signature). Everything looked good, but holy cow have BIOS's changed since I last built a computer. This is also my first ROG motherboard. My last build was a Nehalem build in 2009 (also in signature). Just the idea of being able to use a mouse to navigate the BIOS was new to me, ha! I managed to get my SATA RAID arrays setup and Windows installed on the M.2 drive. I also got the XMP profile loaded for my ram correctly. Now I have to figure out everything else in the BIOS to overclock this thing. Apart from overclocking the CPU, is there a quick cheat sheet of other things that should be tweaked in the BIOS for better performance or anything else I should be aware of with this?


check the kabylake OC guide in my sig. basics of these new bios are the same.


----------



## KedarWolf

Any advice on a thread with a list of 8700k batch numbers and what people are overclocking to with them?

I ask because I'm buying one tomorrow which will have multiple of them in stock and hope to get a better binned chip.









Edit: I see the L730CXXX batch numbers seem to do well on Reddit.

Hope the stock guy at the store doesn't just blow me off and is willing to search the batch numbers.









The website says they have 10+ in stock at the store, I might luck out!









Oh, and I found a delidding service, Conductunaut, relidding service here in Toronto, Canada for $40 CAD.


----------



## encrypted11

You'd no longer be able to find C400s and lower unless your reseller's inventory is from october. They're early batches from limited production runs.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> You'd no longer be able to find C400s and lower unless your reseller's inventory is from october. They're early batches from limited production runs.


Some of it likely is knowing them, but if they don't have older batches any advice on a newer batch lot to choose from?


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Any advice on a thread with a list of 8700k batch numbers and what people are overclocking to with them?
> 
> I ask because I'm buying one tomorrow which will have multiple of them in stock and hope to get a better binned chip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: I see the L730CXXX batch numbers seem to do well on Reddit.
> 
> Hope the stock guy at the store doesn't just blow me off and is willing to search the batch numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The website says they have 10+ in stock at the store, I might luck out!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and I found a delidding service, Conductunaut, relidding service here in Toronto, Canada for $40 CAD.


That's a sweet deal for a delid with the Conductunaut. Any de-lid tool will cost you at least that. I just stumbled onto a post with a Dr. Delid by Aqua Computer. It uses a keyed disk that rotates as it pushes against the IHS which gently twists it loose, lowering the risk of it damaging the PCB when it breaks loose. Looks like a great product (except I can't find one anywhere). Anyway, I just took the plunge too. Received my 8700K from New Egg. My CPU is batch L738C756 so assembled in Malaysia, week of Sept 11, Lot # C. supposedly that is what the batch numbers mean.

I have not even opened the box yet (come on weekend!). I don't have immediate plans to de-lid but will probably end up doing it, especially since I am not going with a custom loop. Just a single Corsair H110i GT (280mm), so I am going to need all the temp help I can get if I ever hope to see 5GHz. I also bought a G,Skill F4-3200C14D-16GTZR kit (which should be Samsung B-Die). My last kit (on X99) was 32-gig so I hope I don't regret going down to 16-gig.There seems to be debate about whether 2 sticks is easier to OC than 4, 16-gig easier than 32-gig. I went for the CAS14 kit because I really want B-Die this time and I was told by G.Skill on their forum that most if not all of the CAS16 kits are Hynix. I didn't ever get my 32-gig kit to where I wanted it on my X99 rig so I am looking forward to better luck with this kit and this platform.

Beware of the Reddit thread I think you are referring to, that talks about where on the wafer the silicone was located affecting OC capability. I suspect (and have been advised) that a lot of what they are saying over there is BS. Anyway, hopefully I will get her up and running this weekend. Almost went X299 but went Z370 instead. Let the adventure begin. Good luck with your build!


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> You'd no longer be able to find C400s and lower unless your reseller's inventory is from october. They're early batches from limited production runs.


That's interesting because the one I received today from New egg is batch L738C756 which I ordered this past Monday. They go in and out of stock just about every day there so I doubt they have been sitting on the shelf. Amazon and Micro Center also sell out regularly. I can't imagine stock of 8700Ks sitting anywhere really.


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> That's interesting because the one I received today from New egg is batch L738C756 which I ordered this past Monday. They go in and out of stock just about every day there so I doubt they have been sitting on the shelf. Amazon and Micro Center also sell out regularly. I can't imagine stock of 8700Ks sitting anywhere really.


That's pretty much the case. Unless you're looking at a reseller selling chips at massively overpriced rates where inventory turnover's really poor, you're not finding a CPU from an older batch.


----------



## l Nuke l

Hey can anyone confirm that the dimm.2 supported fan size is 100mm? My 960 pro just hit 90 degrees. Pretty bad right? hopefully no damage was done.


----------



## nyk20z3

Just got my Apex X today -



I like to scan over the board especially in this price range and make sure everything is okay but i noticed some imperfections on the board such as i have circled below. On my previous Z270 Apex board the flow in and out headers where not squared and it was very noticeable. I am very anal and things like that bother me and not to mention these are top of the line premium boards so the Q&A should reflect that. Based on the pic do you guys think this is acceptable ? Or can it create a problem down the road and i should just return it for another one ?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> Just got my Apex X today -
> 
> 
> 
> I like to scan over the board especially in this price range and make sure everything is okay but i noticed some imperfections on the board such as i have circled below. On my previous Z270 Apex board the flow in and out headers where not squared and it was very noticeable. I am very anal and things like that bother me and not to mention these are top of the line premium boards so the Q&A should reflect that. Based on the pic do you guys think this is acceptable ? Or can it create a problem down the road and i should just return it for another one ?


Wow I thought my OCD was bad, still you have spent your hard earned money on your Apex, if your your not happy with it then exchange it for another


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Some of it likely is knowing them, but if they don't have older batches any advice on a newer batch lot to choose from?


Batch means nothing. You'd have potatoes and good chips in each batch.

As long as it doesn't have a stupid high default VID of perhaps 1.296V (I've scored that with a 7700K, according to der8auer on YT such default VIDs still exist) there's a chance of scoring a non-potato when overclocked.

The voltage/frequency scaling varies from chip to chip and anecdotal evidence suggests that VID tables are indicative of scaling with stock operation, but not overclocked. There's no way you could tell the chip's default VID by the barcode labels regardless.

If you want to be sure your chip isn't a end user binning throwaway before the purchase, look at the ears of the IHS. There should be no nicking of the anodised nickel surface
(sign it has seen mounting pressure from a socket cover). This shouldn't be happening at a wholesaler or distribution level at the very least unless there are warehouse overclockers.


----------



## Feklar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> Just got my Apex X today -
> 
> 
> 
> I like to scan over the board especially in this price range and make sure everything is okay but i noticed some imperfections on the board such as i have circled below. On my previous Z270 Apex board the flow in and out headers where not squared and it was very noticeable. I am very anal and things like that bother me and not to mention these are top of the line premium boards so the Q&A should reflect that. Based on the pic do you guys think this is acceptable ? Or can it create a problem down the road and i should just return it for another one ?


Once you put your graphics card in slot 1, you'll never see it. I know since I have the same board in a different build.


----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Wow I thought my OCD was bad, still you have spent your hard earned money on your Apex, if your your not happy with it then exchange it for another


Its an option but you know returning stuff is always a pain in the butt.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Feklar*
> 
> Once you put your graphics card in slot 1, you'll never see it. I know since I have the same board in a different build.


Its going back in my Thermaltake P5 chassis so the gpu will be mounted vertical. It will still most likely block it from that view but i will still know its there. Its really a toss up, we should get perfection in a board like this i was just curious if it was more prone to fail with an imperfection like that.


----------



## RamGuy

Hmm.. I was updating one Asus Maximus IX Apex (Z270/Kaby-Lake) and one Asus Maximus X Apex (Z370/Coffee-Lake) to Intel MEI firmware version 11.8.50.3426. The utility claims it went successfully and upon rebooting the Maximus IX Apex I can verify the firmware as 11.8.50.3426 in the UEFI BIOS and by using MeInfo afterwards.

On the Maximus X Apex on the other hand I'm stuck with v0.0.0.0 in the UEFI BIOS and the MeInfo-tool doesn't seem able to work anymore. I suppose its a bad flash and now the MEI Firmware has been corrupted or something? Am I totally screwed or is there something I can do to restore it? And does it really matter? What exactly does the MEI on consumer boards do?


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RamGuy*
> 
> Hmm.. I was updating one Asus Maximus IX Apex (Z270/Kaby-Lake) and one Asus Maximus X Apex (Z370/Coffee-Lake) to Intel MEI firmware version 11.8.50.3426. The utility claims it went successfully and upon rebooting the Maximus IX Apex I can verify the firmware as 11.8.50.3426 in the UEFI BIOS and by using MeInfo afterwards.
> 
> On the Maximus X Apex on the other hand I'm stuck with v0.0.0.0 in the UEFI BIOS and the MeInfo-tool doesn't seem able to work anymore. I suppose its a bad flash and now the MEI Firmware has been corrupted or something? Am I totally screwed or is there something I can do to restore it? And does it really matter? What exactly does the MEI on consumer boards do?


I think on the board the ASUS CrashFree BIOS 3 function can fix a corrupted BIOS. You start the PC, as soon as you do plug in a USB with the BIOS properly renamed on it it the BIOS flashback port, it restores the BIOS.

https://www.asus.com/uk/support/FAQ/1012219/

Or you can try BIOS flashback in the proper USB port with the renamed BIOS and press the BIOS flashback button.


----------



## RamGuy

The UEFI BIOS itself is working. I tried a reflash of the BIOS using EZ Flash 3 as well as BIOS Flash Back but it doesn't seem to flash the Intel MEI firmware so its still at v0.0.0.0.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> Its an option but you know returning stuff is always a pain in the butt.
> Its going back in my Thermaltake P5 chassis so the gpu will be mounted vertical. It will still most likely block it from that view but i will still know its there. Its really a toss up, we should get perfection in a board like this i was just curious if it was more prone to fail with an imperfection like that.


It's just an inductor. As long as there's sufficient pad contact, this type of rotation will pass qc. There is no difference to lifespan in these scenarios.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RamGuy*
> 
> Hmm.. I was updating one Asus Maximus IX Apex (Z270/Kaby-Lake) and one Asus Maximus X Apex (Z370/Coffee-Lake) to Intel MEI firmware version 11.8.50.3426. The utility claims it went successfully and upon rebooting the Maximus IX Apex I can verify the firmware as 11.8.50.3426 in the UEFI BIOS and by using MeInfo afterwards.
> 
> On the Maximus X Apex on the other hand I'm stuck with v0.0.0.0 in the UEFI BIOS and the MeInfo-tool doesn't seem able to work anymore. I suppose its a bad flash and now the MEI Firmware has been corrupted or something? Am I totally screwed or is there something I can do to restore it? And does it really matter? What exactly does the MEI on consumer boards do?


I'd download the BIOS again, try updating the MEI firmware a second time, rename it, flash it with the BIOS flashback function in the correct USB port.









And make sure you're using the correct MEI firmware for Z370.


----------



## RamGuy

I've tried going through the "Crash Free BIOS", BIOS Flash Back and regular EZ3 Flash. I have tried to go back to stock uefi bios version, updating to the latest etc.. It's still stuck at MEI Firmware v0.0.0.0. I can't redo the flashing using the MEI Firmware Tool as the tool no longer recognises the MEI due to the fact that the firmware is not working.

It seems like I'm stuck.. The big question is, should I care? What exactly does the Intel MEI Firmware do? I can't say I notice any difference in performance, overclocking or anything without it thus far.


----------



## elefantopia

ASUS z370 bios doesn't allow for cpu fan to drop down to 0 RPM?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elefantopia*
> 
> ASUS z370 bios doesn't allow for cpu fan to drop down to 0 RPM?


Of course not. You can set the monitor to "Ignore" if you are not using the cpu or cpu opt headers


----------



## elefantopia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Of course not. You can set the monitor to "Ignore" if you are not using the cpu or cpu opt headers


Why "off course not" ... I want the CPU cooling to be passive up to 40C


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elefantopia*
> 
> Why "off course not" ... I want the CPU cooling to be passive up to 40C


use a different header and set the cpu header to Ignore. The other PWM headers have "allow Stop".


----------



## elefantopia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> use a different header and set the cpu header to Ignore. The other PWM headers have "allow Stop".


Very cool, I just looked and all cafe fans are taken (it's a prime-A), does the AIO header or the cpu-opt work for that?


----------



## l Nuke l

Can anyone thats usung a fan on a dimm.2 confirm that a 120mm fan can be used? Wanna purchase one but wanna makes sure it fits.


----------



## SpeedyIV

I'm reading the manual for my Hero WIFI. It says the VRM fan bracket can hold a 40mm fan or a 50mm fan. Is there any reason one would be better than the other (other than 50 is bigger than 40)? I guess I will pick up a 50mm PWM. Just wondering if I need to look out for clearance problems.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

For those of you wanting the auto defaults of the Strix-F:
I reset back to optimal defaults, and just changed the clock speeds, everything else is Auto, should give a clearer picture what the VID is doing with this cpu.
These screenshot were taken after a run of Cinebench.

Stock no MCE:


4.5Ghz


4.8Ghz


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm pretty much an idiot.

Only CPU cooler I have is my EKWB Predator 360.

Come home with my 8700k and Strix Z370-F, insert CPU, put M.2 under the heatsink, go to screw 360 standoffs into the motherboard and find it needs a backplate, springs and standoffs that came with the 360 which I conveniently threw out when I threw out the box months ago.

So, tomorrow I'm off to buy a $70 CAD cheap 240 AIO which I'll use until I can get the parts from EK I need and that most likely be until the end of the month unless EK has mercy on me, but I know they charge for parts and shipping to Canada as well.









After the AIO I'll have $10 to my name so it'll be the end of the month when I get paid to get the parts shipped.









No big deal really though. I'm not delidding it until three weeks or so when I get my Rocket 88 delidding and relidder tool so I won't really be pushing it until then, maybe a mild crappy AIO OC and at least see what I can do on memory with my CL14 3200 b-die G-Skill kit. Peeps say they are hitting 4000MHZ with that kit.


----------



## KedarWolf

Decent video, the only thing I'd do differently is use a tiny bead of silicon thermal glue along the bottom edges of the IHS, place it on the base chip and then relid it rather than the messy super glue.

I have the thermal glue already.









Better video here but likely better to use the thermal liquid metal on CPU and IHS like the first video.


----------



## DStealth

I have set CPU fan to ignore as It's not usable with radiator on top...
And cannot run XTU any suggestions


----------



## ChaosAD

Finally i have gathered all parts and finished my build today. I run a 8700k on a HeroX. No matter what vcore i set the core vid in both HWinfo and coretemp shows 1.24v. Vcore under the hero X tab in HWinfo shows the correct vcore. Is this normal?


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I have set CPU fan to ignore as It's not usable with radiator on top...
> And cannot run XTU any suggestions


I have seen that occur when your memory timings are not stable, especially when overclocking ram and either timings, rtl/iol and/or voltages relating to memory are not correct. It then causes XTU not to load or run properly.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> I have seen that occur when your memory timings are not stable, especially when overclocking ram and either timings, rtl/iol and/or voltages relating to memory are not correct. It then causes XTU not to load or run properly.


Can run 32M 200mhz more and not that relaxed timings same voltage...Strange when switched to Asus Maximus X Hero this appeared SW wise all is the same just the board(and not able to use CPU fans headers...on very unusable place to be honest while using radiator on top of the case) , reinstalled a couple of times XTU and different versions all remained the same...
Edit: For sure not the memory all set to auto

My mem can run stable 2666-3000 cl12-12-12-28 w/o issues....so the problem is elsewhere


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Decent video, the only thing I'd do differently is use a tiny bead of silicon thermal glue along the bottom edges of the IHS, place it on the base chip and then relid it rather than the messy super glue.
> 
> I have the thermal glue already.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Better video here but likely better to use the thermal liquid metal on CPU and IHS like the first video.


I use a silicon sealer but the first time I delidded a 7700k I used super glue per Rocket's instructions, it was easier to use then later I delidded again just to see if it was possible without destroying the thing, it went easy so either way is fine, it may be easier to resale if you use silicon


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Can run 32M 200mhz more and not that relaxed timings same voltage...Strange when switched to Asus Maximus X Hero this appeared SW wise all is the same just the board(and not able to use CPU fans headers...on very unusable place to be honest while using radiator on top of the case) , reinstalled a couple of times XTU and different versions all remained the same...
> Edit: For sure not the memory all set to auto
> 
> My mem can run stable 2666-3000 cl12-12-12-28 w/o issues....so the problem is elsewhere


Just as a test, as i see your cpu is overclocked in the screenshot, can you Load Optimized Defaults on your Hero board and then see if XTU runs correctly.
If it does then the issue has to be something with your overclocked settings.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elefantopia*
> 
> Very cool, I just looked and all cafe fans are taken (it's a prime-A), does the AIO header or the cpu-opt work for that?


cpu opt fan is the same as cpu fan. AIO header ? IDK, You can always move the other fans to the cpu header and aio, put the ones you want to stop on the 'Alow Stop" fan headers, Frankly, with passive on an air cooler, I would not stop the fans at all. Not on these fast heating chips.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Can anyone thats usung a fan on a dimm.2 confirm that a 120mm fan can be used? Wanna purchase one but wanna makes sure it fits.


129 cannot fit. Use a Gelid 5 or Gelid 4 -type fan.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> I'm reading the manual for my Hero WIFI. It says the VRM fan bracket can hold a 40mm fan or a 50mm fan. Is there any reason one would be better than the other (other than 50 is bigger than 40)? I guess I will pick up a 50mm PWM. Just wondering if I need to look out for clearance problems.


I have gelid 5s on this APEX. fits fine. But it will make swapping out an ek supremacy block awkward.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I use a silicon sealer but the first time I delidded a 7700k I used super glue per Rocket's instructions, it was easier to use then later I delidded again just to see if it was possible without destroying the thing, it went easy so either way is fine, it may be easier to resale if you use silicon


Yeah, that super glue advice is interesting. Probably the best interms of IHS contact with the die, but it's very rigid. With super glue.. a dab of (pure) acetone will break up the polyacrylamide and make popping th etop off (again) real easy. Acetone will not affect the PCB.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Use a Gelid 5 or Gelid 4 -type fan.
> I have gelid 5s on this APEX. fits fine. But it will make swapping out an ek supremacy block awkward.


Thanks Jpmboy. GELID Solutions Silent5 FN-SX05-40 50mm PC Computer Case Fanmboy on Amazon for $6.00 is a DC fan rated at 23 db(a) which is pretty good. Is this what you are referring to?

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B008S1DN66/ref=psdc_11036291_t2_B00AAEU22M

I was thinking a PWM fan would be preferable. I will probably not use the MOBO fan control as I have had great success using a Corsair Commander Pro in my current X99 rig. I use SIV instead of Corsair's buggy Link program and it does everything I want, flawlessly (SIV fan boy here for sure!).

I hope to hit 5GHz after a delid but am not planning to run an aggressive overclock 24/7 so I don't need a little wizzer fan running full tilt all the time. I can control a DC fan with the Commander Pro and SIV just fine but a PWM fan will allow a lower minimum speed. Ideally I would like to have this fan off until VRM temp is a concern. Maybe I am over complicating this. Right now I am looking at a bunch of unopened boxes - CPU, MOBO, RAM,AIO cooler - guess I should focus on the basics for now. Open boxes, admire, wince at receipts, start building. Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

How exactly do I flash a BIOS from within the BIOS.

I downloaded it, unzipped it, not seen my Easy Flash.









I have an Asus ROG Strix X370-F.


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> How exactly do I flash a BIOS from within the BIOS.
> 
> I downloaded it, unzipped it, not seen my Easy Flash.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have an Asus ROG Strix X370-F.


If Im not mistaken, inside the BIOS go to Tools, then EZ Flash. There you can update from the Internet or from a hard drive.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> If Im not mistaken, inside the BIOS go to Tools, then EZ Flash. There you can update from the Internet or from a hard drive.


Your not mistaken, if it is on a USB drive it is easy to find


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Thanks Jpmboy. GELID Solutions Silent5 FN-SX05-40 50mm PC Computer Case Fanmboy on Amazon for $6.00 is a DC fan rated at 23 db(a) which is pretty good. Is this what you are referring to?
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B008S1DN66/ref=psdc_11036291_t2_B00AAEU22M
> 
> I was thinking a PWM fan would be preferable. I will probably not use the MOBO fan control as I have had great success using a Corsair Commander Pro in my current X99 rig. I use SIV instead of Corsair's buggy Link program and it does everything I want, flawlessly (SIV fan boy here for sure!).
> 
> I hope to hit 5GHz after a delid but am not planning to run an aggressive overclock 24/7 so I don't need a little wizzer fan running full tilt all the time. I can control a DC fan with the Commander Pro and SIV just fine but a PWM fan will allow a lower minimum speed. Ideally I would like to have this fan off until VRM temp is a concern. Maybe I am over complicating this. Right now I am looking at a bunch of unopened boxes - CPU, MOBO, RAM,AIO cooler - guess I should focus on the basics for now. Open boxes, admire, wince at receipts, start building. Thanks!


I don't think you can find a 40 or 50mm fan that is PWM, I have a couple small fans, noise blocker 50mm and Noctua 40mm both are quite at high rpms and both have sleeved fan cables


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *reset1101*
> 
> If Im not mistaken, inside the BIOS go to Tools, then EZ Flash. There you can update from the Internet or from a hard drive.
> 
> 
> 
> Your not mistaken, if it is on a USB drive it is easy to find
Click to expand...

Figured it out, guys, had to scroll on drive to find it.


----------



## KedarWolf

@Jpmboy

Is 4.9 core. 4.6 cache at 1.28v in BIOS, 1.329 in HWInfo while RealBench is running a decent start?

This is with a really crappy AIO and no delid yet.

And can you or someone post BIOS screenshots as to where to start to try to get 4000MHZ RAM on my CL14 G.Skill b-die 4x8GB kit?

Thank peeps,

I'm thinking I might have a decent chip.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> @Jpmboy
> 
> Is 4.9 core. 4.6 cache at 1.28v in BIOS, 1.329 in HWInfo while RealBench is running a decent start?
> 
> This is with a really crappy AIO and no delid yet.
> 
> And can you or someone post BIOS screenshots as to where to start to try to get 4000MHZ RAM on my CL14 G.Skill b-die 4x8GB kit?
> 
> Thank peeps,
> 
> I'm thinking I might have a decent chip.


What LLC are you using and did you test with Prime95?
I'm getting around the same until I try Prime95, then I need 1.344v


----------



## KedarWolf

I made a script and compiled it as well to run 12 instances of MemTestPro 6.0 that'll automatically allocate the RAM and start them all one at a time all laid out nicely in even rows.

It uses 95% of 32GB of RAM.

Either just run the .exe from the .zip file in your MemTestPro 6.0 folder or do below.

Download this program install it.

https://autohotkey.com/

Unzip attached zip file, have MemTestPro 6.0 in the same folder, right click, 'Run Script', it'll have that option if you installed AutoHotKey.

If you need to change the memory size right click script and 'Edit Script'.

6700k.zip 526k .zip file


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> @Jpmboy
> 
> Is 4.9 core. 4.6 cache at 1.28v in BIOS, 1.329 in HWInfo while RealBench is running a decent start?
> 
> This is with a really crappy AIO and no delid yet.
> 
> And can you or someone post BIOS screenshots as to where to start to try to get 4000MHZ RAM on my CL14 G.Skill b-die 4x8GB kit?
> 
> Thank peeps,
> 
> I'm thinking I might have a decent chip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What LLC are you using and did you test with Prime95?
> I'm getting around the same until I try Prime95, then I need 1.344v
Click to expand...

Which version of Prime 95 do I need and how do I set up the AVX settings in the BIOS?

I was testing with RealBench.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Which version of Prime 95 do I need and how do I set up the AVX settings in the BIOS?
> 
> I was testing with RealBench.


That's fine I was just checking.
You need to pump a lot more voltage through to get it Prime95 Stable.
What I can pass with every other stress test (Realbench, XTU, x265, x264 AIDA64) I need to increase the voltages to pass prime.
[email protected], I will need 1.310v to pass prime.

I'm not using a AVX offset though.

Just grab the latest Prime95 and use these settings if you want to try:


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Thanks Jpmboy. GELID Solutions Silent5 FN-SX05-40 50mm PC Computer Case Fanmboy on Amazon for $6.00 is a DC fan rated at 23 db(a) which is pretty good. Is this what you are referring to?
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B008S1DN66/ref=psdc_11036291_t2_B00AAEU22M
> 
> I was thinking a PWM fan would be preferable. I will probably not use the MOBO fan control as I have had great success using a Corsair Commander Pro in my current X99 rig. I use SIV instead of Corsair's buggy Link program and it does everything I want, flawlessly (SIV fan boy here for sure!).
> 
> I hope to hit 5GHz after a delid but am not planning to run an aggressive overclock 24/7 so I don't need a little wizzer fan running full tilt all the time. I can control a DC fan with the Commander Pro and SIV just fine but a PWM fan will allow a lower minimum speed. Ideally I would like to have this fan off until VRM temp is a concern. Maybe I am over complicating this. Right now I am looking at a bunch of unopened boxes - CPU, MOBO, RAM,AIO cooler - guess I should focus on the basics for now. Open boxes, admire, wince at receipts, start building. Thanks!


yep - that's the one. I grabbed a few and they perform quite well on the z370 Apex. No pics right now...

on x299


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Which version of Prime 95 do I need and how do I set up the AVX settings in the BIOS?
> 
> I was testing with RealBench.
> 
> 
> 
> That's fine I was just checking.
> You need to pump a lot more voltage through to get it Prime95 Stable.
> What I can pass with every other stress test (Realbench, XTU, x265, x264 AIDA64) I need to increase the voltages to pass prime.
> [email protected], I will need 1.310v to pass prime.
> 
> I'm not using a AVX offset though.
> 
> Just grab the latest Prime95 and use these settings if you want to try:
Click to expand...

I'm Prime95 stable at 1.3v in BIOS, LLC 6 at 4.9GHZ CPU, cache 4.7GHZ.









I did have to raise my System Agent and VCCIO from 1.2 and 1.15 to 1.215 and 1.165 though to get it Prime stable. Got errors before that.

So if you're struggling with it try adjusting them a notch.


----------



## KedarWolf

Pro Tip:

If your OC fails and your system won't boot, just hangs on, unplug the power cord, wait 60 seconds and plug it back in and start your PC.

The Crash Free BIOS function will be enabled and it'll temporarily load safe BIOS defaults let you into your BIOS, let you make changes you need to keeping all your other BIOS settings, then F10 to save and try again..









On a hang, you need to totally unplug your system and power it off long enough for all the power to drain from the power supply before you restart it for it to load safe BIOS defaults.


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> @Jpmboy
> 
> And can you or someone post BIOS screenshots as to where to start to try to get 4000MHZ RAM on my CL14 G.Skill b-die 4x8GB kit?
> 
> Thank peeps,
> 
> I'm thinking I might have a decent chip.


Hi Kedar, see spoiler for settings I used for 4200MHz C17 with tight secondary/tertiary timings. 1 HR GSAT stable in Windows environment.








_*Note - I have not overclocked my CPU Core/Cache yet, pending delid and watercooling parts._



Spoiler: BIOS Settings


----------



## DStealth

You're using 2*8gb...
With 4*8gb 4Ghz are not that easy and IMC struggles the performance....
KedarWolf better strict to 3700-3900 1T as low timings as possible. You can try hither but will loose performance, keep in mind the key settings to get 4+ with 4 dimms is set twcl from AUTO 15 to manual 16 settings and VCCSA/IO to 1.2-1.25v Good luck mate


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I don't think you can find a 40 or 50mm fan that is PWM, I have a couple small fans, noise blocker 50mm and Noctua 40mm both are quite at high rpms and both have sleeved fan cables


50mm PWM fans do exist though most of them I found on Amazon were 5 VDC. This Sunon MagLev 5CM MF50101V1-Q020-S99 5010 is 12VDC 1.44 watts. I don't know if it is really a mag lev fan or if that is just the name they print on it. I can't find any performance specs on it so I probably will pass on this one. If I can find one with actual performance specs I will go with PWM. Fractal also makes several models but the GeLid Jpmboy suggested seem to have the best specs - 4000RPM - 12.9CFM - 2.8mm H20 Static Pressure - 23 db(a). That's pretty good for a 50mm fan.

https://www.amazon.com/SUNON-MF50101V1-Q020-S99-1-44W-4Wire-Cooling/dp/B00J2JUBMM


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I made a script and compiled it as well to run 12 instances of MemTestPro 6.0 that'll automatically allocate the RAM and start them all one at a time all laid out nicely in even rows.
> 
> It uses 95% of 32GB of RAM.
> 
> Either just run the .exe from the .zip file in your MemTestPro 6.0 folder or do below.
> 
> Download this program install it.
> 
> https://autohotkey.com/
> 
> Unzip attached zip file, have MemTestPro 6.0 in the same folder, right click, 'Run Script', it'll have that option if you installed AutoHotKey.
> 
> If you need to change the memory size right click script and 'Edit Script'.
> 
> A new and improved version of the script and .exe that loads really fast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6700k.zip 526k .zip file


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Just as a test, as i see your cpu is overclocked in the screenshot, can you Load Optimized Defaults on your Hero board and then see if XTU runs correctly.
> If it does then the issue has to be something with your overclocked settings.


The same error with all defaults loaded just CPU fan set to ignore...


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I'm Prime95 stable at 1.3v in BIOS, LLC 6 at 4.9GHZ CPU, cache 4.7GHZ.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did have to raise my System Agent and VCCIO from 1.2 and 1.15 to 1.215 and 1.165 though to get it Prime stable. Got errors before that.
> 
> So if you're struggling with it try adjusting them a notch.


Well not such luck at those voltages for me.
[email protected] (1.355v BIOS), didn't matter what I did to the VCCIO or VCCSA.
[email protected] (1.285v BIOS).

No AVX offset on either overclock.

What's interesting is looking at Silicon lottery's 4.9Ghz chip it requires 1.387V Vcore with a -2 AVX offset.
I can do Prime95 without the offset at a lower voltage, just need that delid for temps.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> 50mm PWM fans do exist though most of them I found on Amazon were 5 VDC. This Sunon MagLev 5CM MF50101V1-Q020-S99 5010 is 12VDC 1.44 watts. I don't know if it is really a mag lev fan or if that is just the name they print on it. I can't find any performance specs on it so I probably will pass on this one. If I can find one with actual performance specs I will go with PWM. Fractal also makes several models but the GeLid Jpmboy suggested seem to have the best specs - 4000RPM - 12.9CFM - 2.8mm H20 Static Pressure - 23 db(a). That's pretty good for a 50mm fan.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/SUNON-MF50101V1-Q020-S99-1-44W-4Wire-Cooling/dp/B00J2JUBMM


One of my requirements for fans is sleeved cables not only for looks, it is much easier to route the cable neatly, ASUS bios can control 3 pin non pwn fans


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> The same error with all defaults loaded just CPU fan set to ignore...


Then it must be a driver issue of some sort. I think you had an Asrock board before correct? If you have swapped out the board on the same OS install,.then to make sure all previous board drivers are removed and the OS image drivers are properly reset do the following:

Uninstall XTU
Uninstall all prior Asrock board drivers and any utilities pertaining to the Asrock board in Programs and Features in Control Panel
Then run Sysprep generalize as per the link below, which will reset all drivers and then setup the OS with fresh drivers for the new board. This process does not remove any data or applications.
Then once complete install the latest drivers from the Asus Hero website
Then install the latest version of XTU and it should then all work correctly

Sysprep Generalize - https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/manufacture/desktop/sysprep--generalize--a-windows-installation

Sysprep step by step - https://www.petri.com/using-syspre-windows-10


----------



## ChaosAD

If i try to run my mem (gskill 2x8gb 3600c16) at 4000c16 i get ac q code at boot, no matter what volt i use for ddr/vccio/sa. Is it impossilbe to run them that high or i do something wrong? They run perfectly fine up to 3866 though.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChaosAD*
> 
> If i try to run my mem (gskill 2x8gb 3600c16) at 4000c16 i get ac q code at boot, no matter what volt i use for ddr/vccio/sa. Is it impossilbe to run them that high or i do something wrong? They run perfectly fine up to 3866 though.


What timings are you using for 4000? Sometimes you need to loose them more, but also not every ram can do 400Mhz OC

I have a "meh" G Skill 3200 CL16 that can do 3400 with a CL 18 but not much above that, so I decided to just leave it at stocks as the gains aren't much.


----------



## SpeedyIV

2 questions. Where to find a used delid tool and a cheap Windows 10 key.

I have just started on my Z370 build. Have it temp wired on the bench with Windows and drivers installed. Have not started any overclocking but I am 99% sure I will delid the CPU. The Aquacomputer Doctor Delid looks really interesting because it applies pressure to all 4 corners of the IHS and gently twists it off. There is also a Pro version but I don't know what the difference is. I also can't find one anywhere. Their site says available in 30 days.

Second best looks like the Rockit 88 for $40. Late last night there was 1 on eBay used once for $21.88 (weird price). According to the Rockit website there is a new improved version. So I asked the seller if he knew which version it was. I went to sleep at 3am and now (10am) it's been sold







It was the only 1 on eBay and now I am kicking myself for hesitating and worrying about whether is was the new version. I don't even know what the difference is between the new version and the old version.

So before I shell out the $40 for a new one that I will probably use once, I am asking if anyone has one they would like to sell or knows where I may find another used one for sale. Also, there are others on eBay for cheap that look like no name Chinese deals for about $25, and ones that are 3D printed plastic for $12. I am wondering if anyone has used one of these.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-LGA-115x-CPU-Delid-Tool-for-3770K-4790K-6700K-7700K-8700K-Delidding-Chips/222756429343?_trkparms=aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.SEED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D49454%26meid%3D8372b5c883b648bb894524c3085e1bc6%26pid%3D100675%26rk%3D4%26rkt%3D15%26sd%3D182602905846&_trksid=p2481888.c100675.m4236&_trkparms=pageci%253A55db0822-e33c-11e7-96b5-74dbd1804062%257Cparentrq%253A650634111600aa4759e9f03dffe939c4%257Ciid%253A1

https://www.ebay.com/itm/CPU-Delid-Delidding-Tool-for-Intel-Processors-Kabylake-Skylake-Haswell/122761716706?_trkparms=aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.SEED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D49454%26meid%3D6f3c6e7f935c4a1eacbd8d14c4569561%26pid%3D100675%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D15%26sd%3D182602905846&_trksid=p2481888.c100675.m4236&_trkparms=pageci%253A731c5999-e33c-11e7-ba74-74dbd180bd54%257Cparentrq%253A6506f3b71600a8669ac59487ffeacb39%257Ciid%253A1

Finally, I need to aquire a fresh Windows 10 Pro license so am looking at sites that sell retail and OEM keys for cheap. I bought 1 once before from 1 of these sites but worried that the key would be used or would stop working. The key worked (and is still working fine) but now I need a new key for this build. I read that the OEM keys are tied and limited to 1 machine. That's probably OK but I prefer a Retail key just because it is more flexible. Can anyone recommend a place to buy a Windows 10 key for cheap that is legal and will work without problems? Since a lot of people here build new rigs all the time, I figure they have already figured out their go to place for Windows keys.

Thanks!


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> 2 questions. Where to find a used delid tool and a cheap Windows 10 key.
> 
> I have just started on my Z370 build. Have it temp wired on the bench with Windows and drivers installed. Have not started any overclocking but I am 99% sure I will delid the CPU. The Aquacomputer Doctor Delid looks really interesting because it applies pressure to all 4 corners of the IHS and gently twists it off. There is also a Pro version but I don't know what the difference is. I also can't find one anywhere. Their site says available in 30 days.
> 
> Second best looks like the Rockit 88 for $40. Late last night there was 1 on eBay used once for $21.88 (weird price). According to the Rockit website there is a new improved version. So I asked the seller if he knew which version it was. I went to sleep at 3am and now (10am) it's been sold
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was the only 1 on eBay and now I am kicking myself for hesitating and worrying about whether is was the new version. I don't even know what the difference is between the new version and the old version.
> 
> So before I shell out the $40 for a new one that I will probably use once, I am asking if anyone has one they would like to sell or knows where I may find another used one for sale. Also, there are others on eBay for cheap that look like no name Chinese deals for about $25, and ones that are 3D printed plastic for $12. I am wondering if anyone has used one of these.
> 
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-LGA-115x-CPU-Delid-Tool-for-3770K-4790K-6700K-7700K-8700K-Delidding-Chips/222756429343?_trkparms=aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.SEED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D49454%26meid%3D8372b5c883b648bb894524c3085e1bc6%26pid%3D100675%26rk%3D4%26rkt%3D15%26sd%3D182602905846&_trksid=p2481888.c100675.m4236&_trkparms=pageci%253A55db0822-e33c-11e7-96b5-74dbd1804062%257Cparentrq%253A650634111600aa4759e9f03dffe939c4%257Ciid%253A1
> 
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/CPU-Delid-Delidding-Tool-for-Intel-Processors-Kabylake-Skylake-Haswell/122761716706?_trkparms=aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.SEED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D49454%26meid%3D6f3c6e7f935c4a1eacbd8d14c4569561%26pid%3D100675%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D15%26sd%3D182602905846&_trksid=p2481888.c100675.m4236&_trkparms=pageci%253A731c5999-e33c-11e7-ba74-74dbd180bd54%257Cparentrq%253A6506f3b71600a8669ac59487ffeacb39%257Ciid%253A1
> 
> Finally, I need to aquire a fresh Windows 10 Pro license so am looking at sites that sell retail and OEM keys for cheap. I bought 1 once before from 1 of these sites but worried that the key would be used or would stop working. The key worked (and is still working fine) but now I need a new key for this build. I read that the OEM keys are tied and limited to 1 machine. That's probably OK but I prefer a Retail key just because it is more flexible. Can anyone recommend a place to buy a Windows 10 key for cheap that is legal and will work without problems? Since a lot of people here build new rigs all the time, I figure they have already figured out their go to place for Windows keys.
> 
> Thanks!


Strangely I purchased my Windows 10 pro key yesterday from Ebay for $15AU







works a treat, was sick of having updates shoved down my P.C throat, problem solved.
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Windows-10-Pro-32-64-bit-Lifetime-Product-Key-Win-10/292340917347?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&var=591232633518&_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Strangely I purchased my Windows 10 pro key yesterday from Ebay for $15AU
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> works a treat, was sick of having updates shoved down my P.C throat, problem solved.
> https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Windows-10-Pro-32-64-bit-Lifetime-Product-Key-Win-10/292340917347?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&var=591232633518&_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649


Thanks. That's about $11.50 (US) which is a great price. I could not find whether these keys are Retail or OEM. Do you know? I see OEM keys on eBay for as little as $4 which is a bit suspicious... I want to pay as little as possible but also don't want to end up with a compromised key.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Thanks. That's about $11.50 (US) which is a great price. I could not find whether these keys are Retail or OEM. Do you know? I see OEM keys on eBay for as little as $4 which is a bit suspicious... I want to pay as little as possible but also don't want to end up with a compromised key.


To be honest Im not sure the listing doesn't say however for $15 I figured I had nothing to lose







I upgraded from W10 Home and used the Pro key from this listing without any issue's, Microsoft partner seller and they have sold a lot of them with good feed back so.....


----------



## sew333

Hello. My motherboard Asus Z370 Pro Gaming Tuf and 8700K stock.

If i choose that rams:
https://www.morele.net/pamiec-hyperx-fury-ddr4-2x8gb-2666mhz-cl16-hx426c16fb2k2-16-1176476/

HyperX Fury DDR4, 2x8GB, 2666MHz, CL16 (HX426C16FB2K2/16)

If i plug them,bios will automatically choose 2666mhz or back to 2133mhz?: )

Or if i choose that rams:
https://www.x-kom.pl/p/312567-pamiec-ram-ddr4-gskill-16gb-3000mhz-ripjawsv-cl15-2x8gb.html

G.SKILL 16GB 3000MHz RipjawsV CL15 (2x8GB) 1.35

My mobo on auto will use 2666mhz on auto or 2133mhz too ?

Mobo memory:


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sew333*
> 
> Hello. My motherboard Asus Z370 Pro Gaming Tuf and 8700K stock.
> 
> If i choose that rams:
> https://www.morele.net/pamiec-hyperx-fury-ddr4-2x8gb-2666mhz-cl16-hx426c16fb2k2-16-1176476/
> 
> HyperX Fury DDR4, 2x8GB, 2666MHz, CL16 (HX426C16FB2K2/16)
> 
> If i plug them,bios will automatically choose 2666mhz or back to 2133mhz?: )
> 
> Or if i choose that rams:
> https://www.x-kom.pl/p/312567-pamiec-ram-ddr4-gskill-16gb-3000mhz-ripjawsv-cl15-2x8gb.html
> 
> G.SKILL 16GB 3000MHz RipjawsV CL15 (2x8GB) 1.35
> 
> My mobo on auto will use 2666mhz on auto or 2133mhz too ?
> 
> Mobo memory:


Either will work, you will just need to enable XMP so they will operate on their default settings.


----------



## sew333

I know but i ask about default memory speed. 3000 Ripjaws on default auto will work with what speed ( without XMP ) ?
And Kingston 2666mhz on default auto will work with what speed?

https://www.kingston.com/dataSheets/HX426C16FB2K2_16.pdf

• JEDEC/PnP: DDR4-2666 CL16-18-18 @1.2V
• XMP Profile #1: DDR4-2666 CL16-18-18 @1.2V


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sew333*
> 
> Hello. My motherboard Asus Z370 Pro Gaming Tuf and 8700K stock.
> 
> If i choose that rams:
> https://www.morele.net/pamiec-hyperx-fury-ddr4-2x8gb-2666mhz-cl16-hx426c16fb2k2-16-1176476/
> 
> HyperX Fury DDR4, 2x8GB, 2666MHz, CL16 (HX426C16FB2K2/16)
> 
> If i plug them,bios will automatically choose 2666mhz or back to 2133mhz?: )
> 
> Or if i choose that rams:
> https://www.x-kom.pl/p/312567-pamiec-ram-ddr4-gskill-16gb-3000mhz-ripjawsv-cl15-2x8gb.html
> 
> G.SKILL 16GB 3000MHz RipjawsV CL15 (2x8GB) 1.35
> 
> My mobo on auto will use 2666mhz on auto or 2133mhz too ?
> 
> Mobo memory:


depends on the sticks and the bios. it will be 2133 to 2666 as your manual shows.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Pro Tip:
> 
> If your OC fails and your system won't boot, just hangs on, unplug the power cord, wait 60 seconds and plug it back in and start your PC.
> 
> The Crash Free BIOS function will be enabled and it'll temporarily load safe BIOS defaults let you into your BIOS, let you make changes you need to keeping all your other BIOS settings, then F10 to save and try again..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On a hang, you need to totally unplug your system and power it off long enough for all the power to drain from the power supply before you restart it for it to load safe BIOS defaults.


press and hold the start button for 3 sec. the system will post in safe mode. You should not need to pull the plug.


----------



## l Nuke l

Can anyone with an apex confirm that when the power to the psu is turned on there is a white flash around the cpu socket where it says republuc of gamers. There is also a weird sound with this flash. Worried something is shorting whenever i turn off and on the power supply


----------



## Essenbe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Can anyone with an apex confirm that when the power to the psu is turned on there is a white flash around the cpu socket where it says republuc of gamers. There is also a weird sound with this flash. Worried something is shorting whenever i turn off and on the power supply


When you turn the power supply on, the LED behind the ROG logo flashes once, but not bright and not real noticeable. There is no sound though.
I had never even noticed until you posted. That made me look for it. It's that minor.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Essenbe*
> 
> When you turn the power supply on, the LED behind the ROG logo flashes once, but not bright and not real noticeable. There is no sound though.
> I had never even noticed until you posted. That made me look for it. It's that minor.


Here is a video of it happening. The first click you hear is me switching the power supply on then listen for another click shortly after when the rog plate flashes.almost sounds like something is shorting out.


----------



## Essenbe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Here is a video of it happening. The first click you hear is me switching the power supply on then listen for another click shortly after when the rog plate flashes.almost sounds like something is shorting out.


Mine's not nearly that bright and I get no sound, but mine is in a case. I didn't notice it when I was running on the bench though. Certainly no sound.


----------



## l Nuke l

I had the light off in my room because with the light on you can barely see it. And I doubt u could hear it in a case. Anyone running this on a bench that can confirm?


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Can anyone with an apex confirm that when the power to the psu is turned on there is a white flash around the cpu socket where it says republuc of gamers. There is also a weird sound with this flash. Worried something is shorting whenever i turn off and on the power supply


Hello

These effects are normal and vary depending on the bulk capacitance of the PSU.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> These effects are normal and vary depending on the bulk capacitance of the PSU.


k cool i hope so


----------



## SpeedyIV

I am reading this thread on the ROG forum about the Maximus Hero (both versions) having or not having VRM temp show up in the EC Sensor section of HWinFO64. Some people are seeing a value for VRM temps and some are not. Several have PM'd Raja but so far no response. So I am asking here - are people with Maximus Hero boards seeing a value for VRM temps in HWiNFO64 or not?

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?97864-Maximus-Hero-X/page2

Thanks !


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> I am reading this thread on the ROG forum about the Maximus Hero (both versions) having or not having VRM temp show up in the EC Sensor section of HWinFO64. Some people are seeing a value for VRM temps and some are not. Several have PM'd Raja but so far no response. So I am asking here - are people with Maximus Hero boards seeing a value for VRM temps in HWiNFO64 or not?
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?97864-Maximus-Hero-X/page2
> 
> Thanks !


I think you will find that the people that are still running UEFI 0220 are seeing a value for the VRM sensor and those that are running UEFI 0802 are not seeing a value for VRM temperature sensor, as stated earlier if it doesn't show up under the monitor tab in the UEFI then any monitoring software wont show a value for VRM temperature, my Formula did show a value for VRM temperature with UEFI 0220 but does not with 0802.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I think you will find that the people that are still running UEFI 0220 are seeing a value for the VRM sensor and those that are running UEFI 0802 are not seeing a value for VRM temperature sensor, as stated earlier if it doesn't show up under the monitor tab in the UEFI then any monitoring software wont show a value for VRM temperature, my Formula did show a value for VRM temperature with UEFI 0220 but does not with 0802.


Thank you for this info. I did do a search here about this but did not find anything. I just flashed 0802 when I brought the MOBO on line. It had 0502 out of the box. So it appears that the EC / VRM sensor is present and this is a BIOS issue. There are some confused and unhappy campers over on the ROG forum so hopefully Asus will take note and rectify this. Thanks again!


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Thank you for this info. I did do a search here about this but did not find anything. I just flashed 0802 when I brought the MOBO on line. It had 0502 out of the box. *So it appears that the EC / VRM sensor is present and this is a BIOS issue.* There are some confused and unhappy campers over on the ROG forum so hopefully Asus will take note and rectify this. Thanks again!


No problem, even 0802 has issues with the adaptive voltage and not monitoring the VRM sensor, Im sure it will be fixed at some stage. Also some people might be confused by some of the monitoring software and guessing which one is VRM temperature, one of the reasons I use AIDA64 is because things are labelled correctly so no guessing which one


----------



## bloot

My non WiFi Maximus X Hero came with 0213 BIOS and has never shown VRM temp sensor


----------



## KedarWolf

I just ordered a Maximus X Formula with my Christmas bonus!! And I have an existing water loop with quick disconnects I can use with it.










Now to sell my ROG Strix locally, the Strix boards used to be pretty high end back in the day but I feel they really cheaped out with this one.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Pro Tip:
> 
> If your OC fails and your system won't boot, just hangs on, unplug the power cord, wait 60 seconds and plug it back in and start your PC.
> 
> The Crash Free BIOS function will be enabled and it'll temporarily load safe BIOS defaults let you into your BIOS, let you make changes you need to keeping all your other BIOS settings, then F10 to save and try again..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On a hang, you need to totally unplug your system and power it off long enough for all the power to drain from the power supply before you restart it for it to load safe BIOS defaults.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> press and hold the start button for 3 sec. the system will post in safe mode. You should not need to pull the plug.
Click to expand...

Yes, that works.

Sometimes i need to di it twice, but better than having to unplug the power cord.









Rep +1!


----------



## KedarWolf

I ordered a Dr. Delid tool from Aqua Computer.

I like this tool because rather than pushing the IHS straight off it twists it slightly which I feel is safer.

And the price is right with 5 Euro international shipping.

So the total came to about $48 CAD, which is what, about 22.7 cents USD?


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I ordered a Dr. Delid tool from Aqua Computer.
> 
> I like this tool because rather than pushing the IHS straight off it twists it slightly which I feel is safer.
> 
> And the price is right with 5 Euro international shipping.
> 
> So the total came to about $48 CAD, which is what, about 22.7 cents USD?


Hmmm. That is the tool that I really want because of the way it twists off the IHS. When I looked on their site it said estimated lead time 30 days. I just checked it again and it still says that. Did you find a way to get one quicker or are you going to wait?


----------



## encrypted11

Aquacomputer has a hardware rep on OCN.

PM @Shoggy (Sven) if you have to, the stock keeping system on the aquacomputer website hasn't been very accurate at least for me when I got some of their waterblocks.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Aquacomputer has a hardware rep on OCN.
> 
> PM @Shoggy (Sven) if you have to, the stock keeping system on the aquacomputer website hasn't been very accurate at least for me when I got some of their waterblocks.


That is interesting. I was about to order a Rockit88 but perhaps I will check with him first.Thanks !

Edit - Any idea what the difference is between the regular one and the "Pro" model? I can't find an explanation of the differences and the pictures of them on the site look identical to me.


----------



## encrypted11

Acetal (basically a thermoplastic) vs. aluminium.

If you got a Coffee Lake CPU that just hit the retail shelves recently, their silicone adhesives aren't extremely difficult to remove.
It took less than half the amount of force to take the IHS apart on a Coffee Lake than a Kaby Lake, someone else confirmed these findings on one of the comments.

I'd personally go with the plastic version (as I did with my rockit88), you're not touching the pads on metal with these. Acetal is a pretty strong plastic.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I ordered a Dr. Delid tool from Aqua Computer.
> 
> I like this tool because rather than pushing the IHS straight off it twists it slightly which I feel is safer.
> 
> And the price is right with 5 Euro international shipping.
> 
> So the total came to about $48 CAD, which is what, about 22.7 cents USD?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm. That is the tool that I really want because of the way it twists off the IHS. When I looked on their site it said estimated lead time 30 days. I just checked it again and it still says that. Did you find a way to get one quicker or are you going to wait?
Click to expand...

Oh man, I never saw that.









I'll tell you how long it takes for me t get it.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Oh man, I never saw that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll tell you how long it takes for me t get it.


Well I did PM Shoggy (who works for Aqua Computer) and asked if the posted lead times were accurate. If he responds, I will let you know. I myself and about ready to go with the Rockit88. I sent an inquiry about what the difference is between the old style and the new style and James (the owner) sent me back a very nice, detailed explanation of the improvements. If you go with a Rockit, you definitely want the new one.Good luck whatever you decide.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Acetal (basically a thermoplastic) vs. aluminium.
> 
> If you got a Coffee Lake CPU that just hit the retail shelves recently, their silicone adhesives aren't extremely difficult to remove.
> It took less than half the amount of force to take the IHS apart on a Coffee Lake than a Kaby Lake, someone else confirmed these findings on one of the comments.
> 
> I'd personally go with the plastic version (as I did with my rockit88), you're not touching the pads on metal with these. Acetal is a pretty strong plastic.


That is an option - maybe. Rockit is out of the plastic ones. Don't know if he is going to continue to offer them. There are these plastic ones on EBay but I don't know anything about them. Seems like they would work though this one seems to fit a bunch of different chips. I guess it has different shapes formed into it. Hard to tell from the picture.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/FREE-S-H-CPU-Delid-Tool-Coffee-Lake-Kabylake-Skylake-Devils-Canyon-Haswell/182801573162?hash=item2a8fd2a52a:g:GwYAAOSwKoRZYBb3

It's encouraging to know that they are coming apart easily. Mine came from New Egg about a week ago so maybe it is an easy one. It will be my first so I am a bit pensive about the whole thing.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> That is an option - maybe. Rockit is out of the plastic ones. Don't know if he is going to continue to offer them. There are these plastic ones on EBay but I don't know anything about them. Seems like they would work though this one seems to fit a bunch of different chips. I guess it has different shapes formed into it. Hard to tell from the picture.
> 
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/FREE-S-H-CPU-Delid-Tool-Coffee-Lake-Kabylake-Skylake-Devils-Canyon-Haswell/182801573162?hash=item2a8fd2a52a:g:GwYAAOSwKoRZYBb3
> 
> It's encouraging to know that they are coming apart easily. Mine came from New Egg about a week ago so maybe it is an easy one. It will be my first so I am a bit pensive about the whole thing.


I would not use a 3D printed slide tool... it's a poor imitation of a true "shop drift". Rockit or the AQ , or De8auer's tool are the best choices... until you get to the ones that cost a few hundred dollars!


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Oh man, I never saw that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll tell you how long it takes for me t get it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well I did PM Shoggy (who works for Aqua Computer) and asked if the posted lead times were accurate. If he responds, I will let you know. I myself and about ready to go with the Rockit88. I sent an inquiry about what the difference is between the old style and the new style and James (the owner) sent me back a very nice, detailed explanation of the improvements. If you go with a Rockit, you definitely want the new one.Good luck whatever you decide.
Click to expand...

Well, I had already ordered my Dr. Delid so the waiting game is on.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I would not use a 3D printed slide tool... it's a poor imitation of a true "shop drift". Rockit or the AQ , or De8auer's tool are the best choices... until you get to the ones that cost a few hundred dollars!


Yeah I don't think I would use something like this. I don't know what tolerances can be expected from a 3D printer and there is no way to know what kind of 3D printer is making these $12 EBay dealies. This is not the place to skimp to save $20. I have not seen any big expensive ones but will look around just out of curiosity. I would think Silicon Lottery is doing the most "bulk delidding" so maybe they have a more industrial unit. They charge about the same price as the Rockit so maybe I will just send my CPU to them.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Well, I had already ordered my Dr. Delid so the waiting game is on.


I heard back. After new years for the regular model (plastic) and mid January for the Pro model (Aluminum). Look at it this way. This will give you time to establish a good baseline before the delid.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Well, I had already ordered my Dr. Delid so the waiting game is on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I heard back. After new years for the regular model (plastic) and mid January for the Pro model (Aluminum). Look at it this way. This will give you time to establish a good baseline before the delid.
Click to expand...

I ordered yesterday, they mailed it today!!









"The shipment was sent by mail/padded envelope, no tracking information is available for this mode of transportation. If your shipment does not arrive within the usual lead time, then please get in touch with our 0customer support. You can send an e-mail to.."


----------



## SpeedyIV

Huh. Guess you lucked out. The guy I PM'd said no shipping till after new years and mid January for the Pro. Maybe that was their last one? Did you get the regular one or the Pro? Either way, glad it worked out for you.Good luck with the delid


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Huh. Guess you lucked out. The guy I PM'd said no shipping till after new years and mid January for the Pro. Maybe that was their last one? Did you get the regular one or the Pro? Either way, glad it worked out for you.Good luck with the delid


Regular one, not Pro


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Regular one, not Pro


I'm sure the regular one is fine but will be interested in your opinion after you get it. I will probably just go ahead and order the Rockit as I do not want to wait until after the holiday. I don't know why the site and the rep both say there is a lead time but yours shipped right out. I guess you got lucky !!


----------



## encrypted11

Shoggy's pretty accurate. He upgraded me to a larger aqualis reservoir once at no cost, since the shorter variant I got had a longer lead time. He's able to track production schedule of back ordered items as well especially if you're on a bulk order for custom loop parts.

AQC makes well engineered products but you'd have to be extremely patient with the lead times especially for their semi-custom products that their resellers do not stock. 30 day lead times (not inclusive of potential production schedule changes) are not uncommon)

(e.g. special plated cuplex kryos NEXT blocks with PVD/Silver, Vario and vision treatment). While the Dr. Delid seems like a fairly simple product, I guess you missed the last ones that were in stock.

If you're holding on to an 8700K already, get a DDM2 or current rockit revision.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Shoggy's pretty accurate. He upgraded me to a larger aqualis reservoir once at no cost, since the shorter variant I got had a longer lead time. He's able to track production schedule of back ordered items as well.
> 
> AQC makes well engineered products but you'd have to be extremely patient with the lead times especially for their semi-custom products that their resellers do not stock. 30 day lead times
> (not inclusive of potential production schedule changes are not uncommon)
> 
> (e.g. special plated cuplex kryos NEXT blocks with PVD/Silver, Vario and vision treatment)
> 
> If you're holding on to an 8700K already, get a DDM2 or current rockit revision.


I ordered my Dr. Delid regular version yesterday, got an email it was mailed today.









I paid for regular post, so likely be here next week or first week in January at the latest.


----------



## KedarWolf

Anyone in Canada check out this website.

https://www.softwarecity.ca/

I bought a Maximus X Formula motherboard from them and here is my email to them to their Customer Service.

"I ordered a motherboard from you yesterday. I had the shipping address postal code wrong, your sales department called me within 30 minutes minutes to correct this.

Also, you sent it Purolater with less than $10.00 shipping costs, I ordered it yesterday and it came today before Xmas Day.

Also, you were the only retailer that had the item in stock. Not even Canada Computers locally or newegg.ca had it.

And your price was below anyone else that had the motherboard advertised.

Thank you!"

Highly recommend them.


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> I sent an inquiry about what the difference is between the old style and the new style and James (the owner) sent me back a very nice, detailed explanation of the improvements. If you go with a Rockit, you definitely want the new one.Good luck whatever you decide.


Do you mind posting the difference? I bought the older style like 5 months ago and am just curious


----------



## Angantyr

Anyone tried out the new Bios that has been released? ; 0605 https://www.asus.com/dk/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING/HelpDesk_BIOS/


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Angantyr*
> 
> Anyone tried out the new Bios that has been released? ; 0605 https://www.asus.com/dk/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING/HelpDesk_BIOS/


Yes, i'm using it currently on same board.

4.9GHZ CPU/4.7GHZ cache at 1.3v, not delidded yet (stuff in mail to do it myself) memory HCI and stresstestapp stable at 4200MHZ 18-18-18-39 2T., 1.215 VCCIO, 1.215 SA.


----------



## Angantyr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Yes, i'm using it currently on same board.
> 
> 4.9GHZ CPU/4.7GHZ cache at 1.3v, not delidded yet (stuff in mail to do it myself) memory HCI and stresstestapp stable at 4200MHZ 18-18-18-39 2T., 1.215 VCCIO, 1.215 SA.


Sounds great, here's hoping that its a stable BIOS release. Since you're using the latest bios 0605, have you enabled the Intel(R) Speed Shift that comes with it?


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Angantyr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Yes, i'm using it currently on same board.
> 
> 4.9GHZ CPU/4.7GHZ cache at 1.3v, not delidded yet (stuff in mail to do it myself) memory HCI and stresstestapp stable at 4200MHZ 18-18-18-39 2T., 1.215 VCCIO, 1.215 SA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds great, here's hoping that its a stable BIOS release. Since you're using the latest bios 0605, have you enabled the Intel(R) Speed Shift that comes with it?
Click to expand...

I enabled Speed Step but disabled Speed Shift though I read on that Speed Shift is working for someone else with the new BIOS release.

I don't think there is a need for it but to be honest I'm not 100% sure what it does.


----------



## Angantyr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I enabled Speed Step but disabled Speed Shift though I read on that Speed Shift is working for someone else with the new BIOS release.
> 
> I don't think there is a need for it but to be honest I'm not 100% sure what it does.


Yeah, I don't know a whole lot about it either, and I'm still reading up on it, but I've a feeling that it sounds more effective than it actually is.
Quote:


> Compared to Speed Step / P-state transitions, Intel's new Speed Shift terminology, changes the game by having the operating system relinquish some or all control of the P-States, and handing that control off to the processor. This has a couple of noticable benefits. First, it is much faster for the processor to control the ramp up and down in frequency, compared to OS control. Second, the processor has much finer control over its states, allowing it to choose the most optimum performance level for a given task


https://www.anandtech.com/show/9751/examining-intel-skylake-speed-shift-more-responsive-processors


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Angantyr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I enabled Speed Step but disabled Speed Shift though I read on that Speed Shift is working for someone else with the new BIOS release.
> 
> I don't think there is a need for it but to be honest I'm not 100% sure what it does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I don't know a whole lot about it either, and I'm still reading up on it, but I've a feeling that it sounds more effective than it actually is.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Compared to Speed Step / P-state transitions, Intel's new Speed Shift terminology, changes the game by having the operating system relinquish some or all control of the P-States, and handing that control off to the processor. This has a couple of noticable benefits. First, it is much faster for the processor to control the ramp up and down in frequency, compared to OS control. Second, the processor has much finer control over its states, allowing it to choose the most optimum performance level for a given task
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/9751/examining-intel-skylake-speed-shift-more-responsive-processors
Click to expand...

I might try it, but i fear if it's anything like c-states it might affect stability though on my CPU and/or memory overclock.









I ALWAYS disable c-states.


----------



## Angantyr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I might try it, but i fear if it's anything like c-states it might affect stability though on my CPU and/or memory overclock.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I ALWAYS disable c-states.


In that case, I don't think Speed Shift will benefit you, I found this post by the RealTemp Author who explained Speed Shift better than the other sources I found.
Quote:


> Just to clear up some information in this old thread, Speed Shift is a feature of Intel Skylake CPUs, mobile and desktop. It was originally only going to be available in Windows 10, 10586 or newer but because Speed Shift is a feature of the CPU, it can be enabled in any version of Windows. You could also enable Speed Shift in Linux by changing MSR 0x770 from 0 to 1. The easy way to do this in Windows is to download the latest version of ThrottleStop from TechPowerUp, click on the TPL button, check the Speed Shift option and hit Apply or OK. Once enabled within the processor, you can exit ThrottleStop and Speed Shift will remain enabled until you use Sleep, Hibernate or reboot.
> 
> ThrottleStop also lets you access the Speed Shift - Energy Performance Preference (EPP) setting. This can be adjusted from 0 to 255 which gives a user full control of their CPU so they can switch between full performance or maximum energy savings or anywhere in between.
> 
> If you are the type of person that always runs their CPU at maximum MHz then Speed Shift is not for you. If you usually use the Windows Balanced power profile then you should consider turning on Speed Shift instead. Compared to the Windows Balanced profile, Speed Shift does a better job managing the CPU and it will increase off idle performance.


https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/intel-speed-shift-technology-skylake.221929/page-2#post-3540571


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I might try it, but i fear if it's anything like c-states it might affect stability though on my CPU and/or memory overclock.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I ALWAYS disable c-states.


On the past generations c-states sometimes affected sleep / hibernation when overclocking, but not the OC itself.

On the new ones even the sleep issue exists anymore unless it's not stable, but for sure doesn't affect a stable OC and can increase the lifetime of your CPU specially if you do heavy OC.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I might try it, but i fear if it's anything like c-states it might affect stability though on my CPU and/or memory overclock.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I ALWAYS disable c-states.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the past generations c-states sometimes affected sleep / hibernation when overclocking, but not the OC itself.
> 
> On the new ones even the sleep issue exists anymore unless it's not stable, but for sure doesn't affect a stable OC and can increase the lifetime of your CPU specially if you do heavy OC.
Click to expand...

Since X99 I've known to use Adaptive/Offset voltages, enable SpeedStep and disable c-states.

It's pretty much the standard way to overclock your system.


----------



## KedarWolf

On my way home with this.

What an absolutely beautiful motherboard, worth a look.

https://www.asus.com/ca-en/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-FORMULA/


----------



## Angantyr

Been on BIOS 0605 for a while now, and completed a short run with SiSoftware Sandra to check stability. All seems fine, so that's good. Did notice though, that Intel Speed Shift had been enabled by default with the BIOS update. It doesn't conflict with Speed Step, so that's good. But I really have no idea if I should leave Speed Shift ON in BIOS or if there are any gains by keeping it.









EDIT: Can't speak for anyone else, but I choose to disable Speed Shift, that thing seems meant for laptops and tablets. It down clocked as much as possible and as often as possible, it seemed as if it always wanted to be in an idle state. Just in Assassins creeds Origins I had a 21 FPS loss with Speed Shift enabled.


----------



## Angantyr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> On my way home with this.
> 
> What an absolutely beautiful motherboard, worth a look.
> 
> https://www.asus.com/ca-en/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-FORMULA/


Congratulations









Though, just for curiosity's sake, you said you had the same board as me ; ROG STRIX Z370-F.
Any reason you're changing one Z370 board out with another?


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Angantyr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> On my way home with this.
> 
> What an absolutely beautiful motherboard, worth a look.
> 
> https://www.asus.com/ca-en/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-FORMULA/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Congratulations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Though, just for curiosity's sake, you said you had the same board as me ; ROG STRIX Z370-F.
> Any reason you're changing one Z370 board out with another?
Click to expand...

Two reasons, main one is I got an unexpected work bonus for the holidays, second is I feel the Strix line are not high end motherboards any more like they used to be with the X99 version.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Since X99 I've known to use Adaptive/Offset voltages, enable SpeedStep and disable c-states.
> 
> It's pretty much the standard way to overclock your system.


Yes, I've been using offset vcore and SpeedStep since Z77, and unless someone was trying 6Ghz OC, it was pretty much said to leave it enabled / proper configured =)

I was just replying your question: c-states don't affect normal overclock if proper configured, and considering that we can't use offset vcore now on bios 802, it's useful to have it enabled


----------



## SpeedyIV

This may be something stupid but all the LEDs on my Maximus 10 Hero WIFI are off. They lit up fine when I first powered the MOBO. I have installed an M.2 drive, loaded Windows and drivers from Asus site. I am not sure at what point the LEDs went out - just noticed it. I did install Aura but no LEDs strips are plugged into the headers. Just the MOBO LEDs - which are all out. Aura does not seem to do anything.

I went back into the BIOS and made sure ROG Effects Onboard LED is Enabled, Q-Code LED is set to Auto.

I checked RGB LED Lighting - ON, When in sleep, hibernate or soft states - ON.

There is a warning that if ErP Ready is Enabled, all LEDs will be off. ErP is not enabled.

I loaded optimized defaults, cleared CMOS, and even re-flashed BIOS 0802. I don't know what else to do. What could I have done that would cause all of the MOBO LEDs to turn off? Help !


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Yes, I've been using offset vcore and SpeedStep since Z77, and unless someone was trying 6Ghz OC, it was pretty much said to leave it enabled / proper configured =)
> 
> I was just replying your question: c-states don't affect normal overclock if proper configured, and considering that we can't use offset vcore now on bios 802, it's useful to have it enabled


with win10 and speedshift (os native) the c6 state report to the OS is needed for speedshift to function properly. That said, with adaptive vcore and dynamic frequency, there is no reason to leave all c-states enabled (c6 and speedshift exception). Can't get a much lower state than base clock idle withou core parking or core sleep. This can affect responsiveness.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> with win10 and speedshift (os native) the c6 state report to the OS is needed for speedshift to function properly. That said, with adaptive vcore and dynamic frequency, there is no reason to leave all c-states enabled (c6 and speedshift exception). Can't get a much lower state than base clock idle withou core parking or core sleep. This can affect responsiveness.


Guess who's Apex is showing up tomorrow along with a delid.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> This may be something stupid but all the LEDs on my Maximus 10 Hero WIFI are off. They lit up fine when I first powered the MOBO. I have installed an M.2 drive, loaded Windows and drivers from Asus site. I am not sure at what point the LEDs went out - just noticed it. I did install Aura but no LEDs strips are plugged into the headers. Just the MOBO LEDs - which are all out. Aura does not seem to do anything.
> 
> I went back into the BIOS and made sure ROG Effects Onboard LED is Enabled, Q-Code LED is set to Auto.
> 
> I checked RGB LED Lighting - ON, When in sleep, hibernate or soft states - ON.
> 
> There is a warning that if ErP Ready is Enabled, all LEDs will be off. ErP is not enabled.
> 
> I loaded optimized defaults, cleared CMOS, and even re-flashed BIOS 0802. I don't know what else to do. What could I have done that would cause all of the MOBO LEDs to turn off? Help !


Check the Back I/O LED connector and press it all the way, maybe it got loose for some reason and will turn off all the MB lights (it's on the side of the back AUX FAN connector, I think it's AUX_1)

If doesn't work, you can try this: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?94418-Aura-firmware-reflash-recovery-tool


----------



## SpeedyIV

Never mind - After 4 hours, I fixed it. Turns out, when you download the Aura Zip file, BEFORE you unzip it you have to right click it, select properties, then select Unblock, then unzip, then run AsusSetup as Admin. Everything came back on, Aura sees the MOBO and the Trident Z RGB RAM, and it all works perfectly. How in blazes is someone supposed to know this?

I hope this tip can help someone else because this has caused me HOURS of trouble shooting. I found this solution on the ROG forum and it worked for me.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?96851-Can-t-open-AsIO-sys-cant-install-Aura-on-fresh-win-10-system/page2


----------



## SpeedyIV

Delete


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Never mind - After 4 hours, I fixed it. Turns out, when you download the Aura Zip file, BEFORE you unzip it you have to right click it, select properties, then select Unblock, then unzip, then run AsusSetup as Admin. Everything came back on, Aura sees the MOBO and the Trident Z RGB RAM, and it all works perfectly. How in blazes is someone supposed to know this?
> 
> I hope this tip can help someone else because this has caused me HOURS of trouble shooting. I found this solution on the ROG forum and it worked for me.
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?96851-Can-t-open-AsIO-sys-cant-install-Aura-on-fresh-win-10-system/page2


That's a know issue trying to use the "asus setup" for any package, I think that one is meant to be used by the CDROOM installer when everything comes from it.

I always install directly using the setup.exe for any of the custom packages/software you get on the Asus pages


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> That's a know issue trying to use the "asus setup" for any package, I think that one is meant to be used by the CDROOM installer when everything comes from it.
> 
> I always install directly using the setup.exe for any of the custom packages/software you get on the Asus pages


Good to know - Thanks. I was never sure what the difference was. I wonder if I need to go back and re-run all the other Asus drivers and utilities that came over as zip files that I unzipped without un-blocking and ran the AsusSetup file? They seemed to work...

Well it cost me a day, but I learned something...


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Good to know - Thanks. I was never sure what the difference was. I wonder if I need to go back and re-run all the other Asus drivers and utilities that came over as zip files that I unzipped without un-blocking and ran the AsusSetup file? They seemed to work...
> 
> Well it cost me a day, but I learned something...


If it's working then I don't think so. It's not like the AsusSetup never works, but I learned also some time ago that it can sometimes introduce issues so I just started to use the normal setup on everything


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Guess who's Apex is showing up tomorrow along with a delid.


ohhh.. you are gonna like the APEX. Just remember, it likes b-die ram sticks.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ohhh.. you are gonna like the APEX. Just remember, it likes b-die ram sticks.


That's next, I'll just be running my 3200Mhgz Hynix for now, so no ram overclocking.
Will get a 2x16GB kit in the new year.

Suggestions??


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> That's next, I'll just be running my 3200Mhgz Hynix for now, so no ram overclocking.
> Will get a 2x16GB kit in the new year.
> 
> Suggestions??


I know nothing about 16GB DS sticks at this point, but I hope the new sammy ICs do better in that configuration.


----------



## Ripple

So I finally have an updated copy of Windows 7 running on the sig rig below. (Boy, that was fun). Everything works OK but I am missing drivers for the PCI memory controller and SM Bus controller. I tried using the chipset drivers for Win 10 by right-clicking and running as administrator as someone suggested but that didn't work. Any ideas? Thanks in advance


----------



## chibi

Hi guys, any idea what SATA AHCI driver I'm missing? I just did a full reinstall of windows and checked every driver box on the cd that came with the board - what gives?


----------



## encrypted11

-


----------



## l Nuke l

Do you guys regularly update motherboard drivers? If so do old ones need to be removed or do you just install over them?


----------



## Scotty99

Same thing happened to me with asus setup lol, hours of troubleshooting my PC when all i had to was scroll down to setup.

They really need to make that clearer.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Same thing happened to me with asus setup lol, hours of troubleshooting my PC when all i had to was scroll down to setup.
> 
> They really need to make that clearer.


What irritates me is that I download a Zip file from Asus site, right click and unzip it and double-click AsusInstall. Nothing tells me I have to select Properties of the Zip file BEFORE I unzip it and check the "Unblock" box. The zip file unzips, the .exe runs and completes the installation of Aura (albeit with an error message).

I run Aura, which instantly crashes, and opens a browser page to a "DrDump" site, where I see a message that "This is a new error for X99". I am on Z370. Oh it also turns off all MOBO LEDs and leaves the MOBO in a state where NOTHING I do can get them back on. Not an uninstall and reinstall of Aura (which fails horribly), not a CMOS Reset, not Restore Optimum Defaults, not unplugging all power and waiting, not even re-flashing the BIOS. Nothing.

Luckily (for me) there is a whole thread of people with the exact same problem on the ROG forum, and I find this obscure procedure there. Maybe it all would have worked if I had run the SetUp.exe instead of AsusSetup.exe - I don't know for sure as I did not go back and test it, but everyone in the ROG thread said right clicking the Zip file, selecting Properties, and then checking Unblock before unzipping the file fixes everything. Which it did.

Maybe Operator Error since I seem to be the first one to have this happen here but I cannot fathom how Aura can be installed and run, crash, and change something in hardware that cannot be undone by any sort of reset, reboot, or even re-flash. Lord knows Aura has had a sordid past, and there are still all sorts of bug complaints and compatibility issues, and CPU usage creep. This "Feature" I ran into is a landmine, and I am not the only one it has gone off on. In the end, I am a bit upset with Asus on this one. End Rant.









Now back to over clocking.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I know nothing about 16GB DS sticks at this point, but I hope the new sammy ICs do better in that configuration.


Well let me be the guinea pig again and find out lol


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I know nothing about 16GB DS sticks at this point, but I hope the new sammy ICs do better in that configuration.
> 
> 
> 
> Well let me be the guinea pig again and find out lol
Click to expand...

I haven't popped in my Corsair LPX 4x16GB yet. I can barely do 4x8GB CL14 b-die at 4000 with this CPU, and I can only do 2T four or two sticks.









@Jpmboy

I think I have issues popping two sticks in the A2 and B2 slot. That's according to the motherboard manual. I need to do A1-A2 or B1-B2.

Is that the correct configuration?

And when I put them in A2-B2 and disable A1-B1 in BIOS no boot.

How do I configure two sticks and disable the other two DIMMs in BIOS?


----------



## DStealth

I can do ~4ghz with 4 dimms 16-15-15-30-300 1T but this board is not liking 2 dimms all the same settings popping two of them is not booting with 49 error ...very strange so I left 4 dimms even for benching







)


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I can do ~4ghz with 4 dimms 16-15-15-30-300 1T but this board is not liking 2 dimms all the same settings popping two of them is not booting with 49 error ...very strange so I left 4 dimms even for benching
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I figured out how to use two DIMMs AND disable the other two in BIOS.

Put them in the light grey slots, not the darker ones, then do this.



Edit: Can you look on your CPU box and tell me your batch number?

That is really great timings.


----------



## aliquiswe

My DTS application do nothing for the Z370-F Strix. Whatever I click on nothing happens.

Also even turning on studio effects for the webbrowser in sonic studio doesn't seem to change the sound whatsoever.

I did wonder whatever that board also had the DTS Headphone:X like the Prime but it seem like that should be part of the DTS app and I see that if I change the properties for playback I can change the spatial sound to both Sonic and Dolby Atmos so that seem nice. I guess. Shouldn't DTS Headphone:X also be there? Or somewhere? How to use the DTS app at all?

Also the support page doesn't accept the serial from my box.

As for RAM I did find the single .. "lever" design ****. Had a hard time getting one of my modules wanting to stick at the same depth as the other into the socket on the side where there was no lever. The design of RAM slots (and MOLEX connectors) has been **** for a very long time but this design doesn't seem to be an improvement.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> [/SPOILER]
> Edit: Can you look on your CPU box and tell me your batch number?


Batch doesn't matter I have written it in 8700k thread somewhere. Tested 5 from the batch this was below average before delid ...but after it shines, can run all thrown to it with 5.5+ HT on and 5200 Cache....very nice chip and all this with a mere 1.42/4 volts on AIO cooler(EK360) with 400+W 1080Ti in it







)


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ripple*
> 
> So I finally have an updated copy of Windows 7 running on the sig rig below. (Boy, that was fun). Everything works OK but I am missing drivers for the PCI memory controller and SM Bus controller. I tried using the chipset drivers for Win 10 by right-clicking and running as administrator as someone suggested but that didn't work. Any ideas? Thanks in advance


Drivers from the Z270 should work

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Hi guys, any idea what SATA AHCI driver I'm missing? I just did a full reinstall of windows and checked every driver box on the cd that came with the board - what gives?


Intel chipset drivers


----------



## Kuresu

Hey, i've been looking for some answers on the Apex ROG Dimm.2 riser card.

If i were to use the riser card, would i be able to install an EKWB m.2 heatsink on to the SSD and still latch it on to the Riser card?
Or is the standoff not high enough to support a heatsinked m.2 2280


----------



## schoolofmonkey

@Jpmboy

Well it's in and delidded (Thanks Cam).
I'm impressed, haven't had any real time overclocking it, but this was a dirty 4.9Ghz.
Now with my Strix-F no delid, 4.9Ghz needed 1.360v in BIOS hitting a max temp of 91c.

This is it now:


----------



## Menthol

The Dimm.2 riser card for the IX Apex has higher standoffs and it will fit, the new Apex both M10 Apex and R6 Apex Dimm.2 modules have a much lower standoffs and the back plate of the EKWB heatsink will contact some components on the Dimm.2 module, I would not install a heatsink but instead use a 50mm fan on the included fan bracket which will give much lower temps than a heatsink alone


----------



## ChaosAD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I figured out how to use two DIMMs AND disable the other two in BIOS.
> 
> Put them in the light grey slots, not the darker ones, then do this.


According to manual the ram slots that u use when u have only two modules are the grey ones. Any real benefit to disable the other two ram slots?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Batch doesn't matter I have written it in 8700k thread somewhere. Tested 5 from the batch this was below average before delid ...but after it shines, can run all thrown to it with 5.5+ HT on and 5200 Cache....very nice chip and all this with a mere 1.42/4 volts on AIO cooler(EK360) with 400+W 1080Ti in it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


When you say below average can you specify the difference? I ask because i can run [email protected] and max temps are high 60s, undelided with a dedicated 360x60mm rad. Is it worth deliding?


----------



## japau

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kuresu*
> 
> Hey, i've been looking for some answers on the Apex ROG Dimm.2 riser card.
> 
> If i were to use the riser card, would i be able to install an EKWB m.2 heatsink on to the SSD and still latch it on to the Riser card?
> Or is the standoff not high enough to support a heatsinked m.2 2280


I got the setup u mention. No problems here.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> The Dimm.2 riser card for the IX Apex has higher standoffs and it will fit, the new Apex both M10 Apex and R6 Apex Dimm.2 modules have a much lower standoffs and the back plate of the EKWB heatsink will contact some components on the Dimm.2 module, I would not install a heatsink but instead use a 50mm fan on the included fan bracket which will give much lower temps than a heatsink alone


Didnt use any when installed and neither even thought about it. there should be still a small cap between. If paranoid, nothing stops from installing small piece of plasting between them. m2. heatsink lowers the temps by ~20'C so its definately worth it. Dont need noisy 50mm fans if case front has fans. My 960Pro never reach over 60'c anymore.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

That second Apex fan bracket (not the Dimm.2 Riser one), that's for the VRM's right.
How does it actually mount there?


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChaosAD*
> 
> According to manual the ram slots that u use when u have only two modules are the grey ones. Any real benefit to disable the other two ram slots?
> When you say below average can you specify the difference? I ask because i can run [email protected] and max temps are high 60s, undelided with a dedicated 360x60mm rad. Is it worth deliding?


It always worth ...just in some cases not that good chips become golden...
After delid you'll be able to push additional 100-200Mhz more or reduce Voltage depending of your cooling capacity and stability understanding...









Edit: Answering your question bellow average was my chip with the method i tested as was in a hurry 52xCPU 50xCache 1.4v fixed in BIOS and tested CB15 runs upping the BLK before delid BSOD appeared till 5220 to 5260Mhz for all these 5 CPU's tested the one I have now was on the lower border ... But after delid can run CB15 past 5.5 mark....really huge difference and the best tested after delid hit the wall @5360 BSODing...


----------



## Kuresu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *japau*
> 
> I got the setup u mention. No problems here.
> Didnt use any when installed and neither even thought about it. there should be still a small cap between. If paranoid, nothing stops from installing small piece of plasting between them. m2. heatsink lowers the temps by ~20'C so its definately worth it. Dont need noisy 50mm fans if case front has fans. My 960Pro never reach over 60'c anymore.


Thanks for the feedback man. Thats awesome. I'm now even more inclined to go for Apex instead of Formula

Any chance i could see a picture of it? I'm just curious as to how it looks for pure aesthetic reaons. Could send to my inbox if you don't wanna post out in open.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Just saw this on the Apex page:

"ROG MAXIMUS X APEX BIOS 0901
ROG Maximus X APEX (VISHAY MOS) Beta BIOS 0901 Release"


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Do you mind posting the difference? I bought the older style like 5 months ago and am just curious


I decided to go with the Rockit88 after I received 2 very detailed and informative messages from James (the manufacturer). Here is the list of differences as he explained them to me.

_The newer model has a different CPU pocket.
The floor is deeper and the CPU is supported nearer to the center but not on the edges.
This helps with CPU bending since the support is below the area where the IHS contacts.
Also the finger groove has been reduced to one and moved to the backside instead of the sides.
This strengthens the tool in the middle of the CPU pocket and also makes it easier to lower the IHS gently onto the CPU once the TIM and adhesive have been applied.
The relid clamp tool (spyder) has been drastically changed to help with the problem of overtightening the black screw.
Now the tool bends a little and that is the signal that the screw is plenty tight.
Before it was very easy to just torque down on the black screw, bend the CPU and once the adhesive cured, the CPU remained bent.
When installed in the MB it would not contact all the pins and I received many complaints about "My PC won't boot after I delidded, your tool broke my CPU, I want a replacment".
Of course the CPU was not broken, just wasn't making good contact with the CPU socket.
A quick delid and relid with less force on the black bolt would "fix" the broken CPU._

Original Model


New Model


I also told him that I was intrigued by the Doctor Delid which applies force on the corners of the IHS and uses a twisting motion to loosen it. He wrote back that he had considered a design similar to this but decided against it because some CPUs (not the 8700K) have SMDs mounted in locations that could be damaged by this twisting method. He also offered some insight into his design, which impressed me. I don't think he would mind if I shared this information. It made me decide to go with the Rockit. Maybe it will help someone else decide.

_I designed the Rockit 88 to be very safe from the beginning. I did consider the same type of operation that the Dr. Delid uses but at the time (2 years ago) most CPUs had SMDs and the twisting motion would endanger the SMDs in my eyes. I modeled the CPU in CAD and used that, along with years of experience, to make the tool safe. For example, the total travel of the IHS is limited to only 1.5mm. More than enough to shear the factory adhesive but not enough to contact any SMDs. I know the 8700K does not have any SMDs but you have to consider that the tool is meant to delid CPUs all the way back to the Core 2 Duo era (think LGA 775).

The upper half is designed to limit any movement of the CPU pcb so that when the force is applied to the IHS, the CPU will not lift up. This keeps the force needed to shear the adhesive in line with the strongest possible orientation of the pcb. The upper half is also designed to contain the IHS and keep it from bouncing around and possibly contacting anything on the CPU. Everything that contacts the pcb is plastic, this is by design so as to remove the potential for scratching or damaging the pcb. The only part that is aluminum is the pusher and this needs to be strong as all of the force to delid is funneled through it. It is recessed into the upper half to remove any chance that it can contact the pcb and scratch it.

Lastly, the adhesive on the Coffeelake CPUs seems to be a different type than previous CPUs. It's not as strong and the delid is not as violent. Gone is the "POP" that we used to get while delidding. Of course this means that the process is even safer than before. We have found that heating the CPU with a hair dryer can reduce the force needed even more and the delid process is anticlimactic, without any type of pop and a very subtle change in force to let you know that the CPU has been delidded._


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> [/SPOILER]
> 
> I figured out how to use two DIMMs AND disable the other two in BIOS.
> 
> Put them in the light grey slots, not the darker ones, then do this.
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Can you look on your CPU box and tell me your batch number?
> 
> That is really great timings.


May I ask why you disabled the 2 unused RAM slots in the BIOS? I am running a 2 x 8 gig G.Skill Trident-Z RGB CL14 kit in my Maximus X Hero wifi. I populated the 2 gray slots per the manual. They show up fine. Have not started any OC yet. Does disabling the unused slots help in some way or is it just good housekeeping?


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> *Lastly, the adhesive on the Coffeelake CPUs seems to be a different type than previous CPUs. It's not as strong and the delid is not as violent. Gone is the "POP" that we used to get while delidding.* Of course this means that the process is even safer than before. We have found that heating the CPU with a hair dryer can reduce the force needed even more and the delid process is anticlimactic, without any type of pop and a very subtle change in force to let you know that the CPU has been delidded.[/I]


Can confirm that finding once again, nice read!


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> [/SPOILER]
> 
> I figured out how to use two DIMMs AND disable the other two in BIOS.
> 
> Put them in the light grey slots, not the darker ones, then do this.
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Can you look on your CPU box and tell me your batch number?
> 
> That is really great timings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> May I ask why you disabled the 2 unused RAM slots in the BIOS? I am running a 2 x 8 gig G.Skill Trident-Z RGB CL14 kit in my Maximus X Hero wifi. I populated the 2 gray slots per the manual. They show up fine. Have not started any OC yet. Does disabling the unused slots help in some way or is it just good housekeeping?
Click to expand...











I'm thinking it would help an OC has only having two DIMMS enabled, in theory, should be a better as you only have the slots on you're actually using.

I can't confirm this though, just a hunch.









Edit: If you do disable the two slots, don't have memory in the black slots, I think I had issues booting when I did.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm thinking it would help an OC has only having two DIMMS enabled, in theory, should be a better as you only have the slots on you're actually using.
> 
> I can't confirm this though, just a hunch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: If you do disable the two slots, don't have memory in the black slots, I think I had issues booting when I did.


Hmmm. Guess it can't hurt. It may take some strain off the IMC. Maybe. I am interested if you find a difference. I guess dial in your RAM as best you can get it, stability test, then enable the 2 unused slots and see if it affects stability.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> May I ask why you disabled the 2 unused RAM slots in the BIOS? I am running a 2 x 8 gig G.Skill Trident-Z RGB CL14 kit in my Maximus X Hero wifi. I populated the 2 gray slots per the manual. They show up fine. Have not started any OC yet. Does disabling the unused slots help in some way or is it just good housekeeping?


As we have 4 modules from x99/299 migration. To try the maximum OC of them it's better with only two DIMMs ...Long story short we're disabling used slots not unused


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm thinking it would help an OC has only having two DIMMS enabled, in theory, should be a better as you only have the slots on you're actually using.
> 
> I can't confirm this though, just a hunch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: If you do disable the two slots, don't have memory in the black slots, I think I had issues booting when I did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm. Guess it can't hurt. It may take some strain off the IMC. Maybe. I am interested if you find a difference. I guess dial in your RAM as best you can get it, stability test, then enable the 2 unused slots and see if it affects stability.
Click to expand...

DON'T disable any DIMM slots in BIOS. I did, my timings were terrible, couldn't even take the third timings off Auto or PC wouldn't post.









All slots enabled I'm back at 4200MHZ stable.


----------



## KedarWolf

On Z370, do yourself a favour, run AIDA54 cache and memory test after setting your timings before stress testing.

I got 4200 stable in HCI MemTest, but long after the fact I ran AIDA and was only getting just over 40k write and copy.









The issue was my third timings, back on Auto I'm back over 60k read, write and well over 50 copy.


----------



## webwilli

New Apex Bios

Version 0901 2017/12/22

ROG MAXIMUS X APEX BIOS 0901

-ROG Maximus X APEX (VISHAY MOS) Beta BIOS 0901 Release

https://www.asus.com/de/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-APEX/HelpDesk_BIOS/


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ripple*
> 
> So I finally have an updated copy of Windows 7 running on the sig rig below. (Boy, that was fun). Everything works OK but I am missing drivers for the PCI memory controller and SM Bus controller. I tried using the chipset drivers for Win 10 by right-clicking and running as administrator as someone suggested but that didn't work. Any ideas? Thanks in advance


i used the 'EZ loader" method for win 7 right from the ASUS utilities page for the board. sailed right thru the install. Clean device manager.

English_Windows_7_Setup_Guide_DVD.pdf 2588k .pdf file

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I haven't popped in my Corsair LPX 4x16GB yet. I can barely do 4x8GB CL14 b-die at 4000 with this CPU, and I can only do 2T four or two sticks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @Jpmboy
> 
> I think I have issues popping two sticks in the A2 and B2 slot. That's according to the motherboard manual. I need to do A1-A2 or B1-B2.
> 
> Is that the correct configuration?
> 
> And when I put them in A2-B2 and disable A1-B1 in BIOS no boot.
> 
> How do I configure two sticks and disable the other two DIMMs in BIOS?


just the grey slots. no need to switch off empty slots.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I can do ~4ghz with 4 dimms 16-15-15-30-300 1T but this board is not liking 2 dimms all the same settings popping two of them is not booting with 49 error ...very strange so I left 4 dimms even for benching
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I get a 49 if the trls are way off, if I forget that I have an eventual vdimm that's too low, or if the VSA is too low. just








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> @Jpmboy
> 
> Well it's in and delidded (Thanks Cam).
> I'm impressed, haven't had any real time overclocking it, but this was a dirty 4.9Ghz.
> Now with my Strix-F no delid, 4.9Ghz needed 1.360v in BIOS hitting a max temp of 91c.
> 
> This is it now:


5.0 should be easy!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> That second Apex fan bracket (not the Dimm.2 Riser one), that's for the VRM's right.
> How does it actually mount there?


with two tiny fn screws. I had to get the magnifiers out.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> May I ask why you disabled the 2 unused RAM slots in the BIOS? I am running a 2 x 8 gig G.Skill Trident-Z RGB CL14 kit in my Maximus X Hero wifi. I *populated the 2 gray slots per the manual*. They show up fine. Have not started any OC yet. Does disabling the unused slots help in some way or is it just good housekeeping?


^^ This. no need to disable empty slots, vdimm or PCIE.


----------



## DStealth

@Jpmboy
Quote:


> I get a 49 if the trls are way off, if I forget that I have an eventual vdimm that's too low, or if the VSA is too low. just


Yes but I get this when popping out 2 dimms from 4...Hardly doubt some settings are fine with 4 and cannot boot with 2 modules only


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> JPM
> I get a 49 if the trls are way off, if I forget that I have an eventual vdimm that's too low, or if the VSA is too low. just
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes but i get this when popping out 2 dimms from 4...Hardly doubt some setting is fine with 4 and cannot boot with 2 modules only
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


oh, there definitely can be settings that work with 4 but not 2 dimms. When you remove 2, have you done a clrcmos and then let the 2 sticks retrain? I would not assume that just powering off and pulling out 2 will be good to go with settings that work for 4. Common q-codes under that scenario would be 49, 55, 2b


----------



## DStealth

If have time could try this...clear CMOS is not my favorite game


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> If have time could try this...clear CMOS is not my favorite game


just save your settings to a bios save slot or a USb stick (.cmo file).


----------



## fvbarc

Hi to everyone, i have a problem. I've just assembled my new pc: rog strix z370-F core i7 8700k cpu and 8x2Gb GSKILL Trident Z F4-4000c18D-16GTZ.
I'm not able to run memory at 4000MHz.
I set the xmp profile by bios, but the pc doesn't boot.
They run only at 2133MHz
Where am i wrong?


----------



## Scotty99

Welp i officially have the worst 8700k on the planet, will not do 5.0ghz even with 1.4+v. I followed debauers guide to a T it just wont do it, whea errors everytime in cinebench.

Even with a delid and max temps of 75c the best the asus software could muster is 4.9ghz on 4 cores and 4.7ghz on 5 and 6 core loads.

Oh well, still a ton faster than my ryzen system.


----------



## gammagoat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Welp i officially have the worst 8700k on the planet, will not do 5.0ghz even with 1.4+v. I followed debauers guide to a T it just wont do it, whea errors everytime in cinebench.
> 
> Even with a delid and max temps of 75c the best the asus software could muster is 4.9ghz on 4 cores and 4.7ghz on 5 and 6 core loads.
> 
> Oh well, still a ton faster than my ryzen system.


I feel your pain, same with my chip.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fvbarc*
> 
> Hi to everyone, i have a problem. I've just assembled my new pc: rog strix z370-F core i7 8700k cpu and 8x2Gb GSKILL Trident Z F4-4000c18D-16GTZ.
> I'm not able to run memory at 4000MHz.
> I set the xmp profile by bios, but the pc doesn't boot.
> They run only at 2133MHz
> Where am i wrong?


You won't get 4000Mhz XMP with a Strix. You need to manually tune it.


----------



## Scotty99

People with delids, what are you temps with 1.35ish volts? 4.9 seems stable with 1.35 although havent tried lower, gets to 80c in stress test (delid with 240 aio).


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> You won't get 4000Mhz XMP with a Strix. You need to manually tune it.


Yes. I'd aim for DDR4-3600 or DDR4-3733 with the tight timings possible.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> People with delids, what are you temps with 1.35ish volts? 4.9 seems stable with 1.35 although havent tried lower, gets to 80c in stress test (delid with 240 aio).


which stress test? At 1.385 my max temps are 65c running realbench and occt with a corsair h115i and tgk.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> which stress test? At 1.385 my max temps are 65c running realbench and occt with a corsair h115i and tgk.


What the hell, i get 85c in the same stress test at 1.35v....


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> What the hell, i get 85c in the same stress test at 1.35v....


whats your ambient temp? I am also on an open bench table. If your in a case temps may differ.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> whats your ambient temp. I am also on an open bench table.


67f right now, whatever that is in celcius. My case is super wide open for airflow as well (meshify c) with fans populating every possible spot in the case.

About ready to put this pc on craigslist lol.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 67f right now, whatever that is in celcius. My case is super wide open for airflow as well (meshify c) with fans populating every possible spot in the case.
> 
> About ready to put this pc on craigslist lol.


yeah those are pretty low ambients. Idk dude if your possitive ur cooler is properly mounted and you applied enough paste maybe your radiator and fans need to be clean. Up your fan speed if its to low? Or try and run the radiator outside ur case just to test. Not sure what the problen is but at those volts with a delid 85c seems pretty high.


----------



## l Nuke l

Does anyone with an apex have a screenshot of the vrm fan bracket setup on their mobo. Curious to see how it looks. My max vrm temp when testing is 55c, is that average?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Don't worry about the VRM on the Apex, it's beefy. More than enough for high OC 8700k.


----------



## KedarWolf

So,

My Maximus X Formula has a problem.

In the first PCI-e slot my GPU only gets 2x, if I put my 4x Intel 750 in it, I get 2x.

Second PCI-e slot with my GPU in it gets 8x, with Intel 750 in the third slot I get 4x.

I'm going to try blowing it out with my electric blower in the a.m., but the dilemma is:

Do I send it back if it's not working right, it's only a few days old and have up to two weeks with no PC?

Or knowing I'll never add a second GPU do I live with it.


----------



## DStealth

RMA it Cedar 500+ dollars board on the entry level chipset and stolts not working is just not right...stay a cople of days w/o PC would be better than have a defective unit you have to sell at some point...


----------



## Emmett

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Does anyone with an apex have a screenshot of the vrm fan bracket setup on their mobo. Curious to see how it looks. My max vrm temp when testing is 55c, is that average?


I have around 55C with no airflow at all on VRM area on my apex.


----------



## Miao

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Does anyone with an apex have a screenshot of the vrm fan bracket setup on their mobo. Curious to see how it looks. My max vrm temp when testing is 55c, is that average?



It's not an Apex, it's a Z370 Prime-A, and I use an "huge" 60mm Noctua instead of 40/50mm fans supported by that bracket, probably it look orrible for most, but I have the vrm around 30° with [email protected] and I could'nt find the max oc setting yet. I've not tested this system without that fan and can't say if it help and how much.
By the way, if you choose a 40mm fan (maybe a clear/led one) it will not look so bad


----------



## apw63

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> People with delids, what are you temps with 1.35ish volts? 4.9 seems stable with 1.35 although havent tried lower, gets to 80c in stress test (delid with 240 aio).


I'm stress test right now at 4.9 with 1.35 v. My 8700k is from silicon lottery. I'm using aida64, cpu, cache, memory (rog certified profile 3333mhz) and cpu checked. I'm getting after 1 hr 37C on cpu, cores are fluctuating around 45-55C. My system is under water c-u, gpu and vrm. My MB Is an ASUS MXF. I have 2 360mm and 1 240mm RADs. I have a avx-1 offset.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *apw63*
> 
> I'm stress test right now at 4.9 with 1.35 v. My 8700k is from silicon lottery. I'm using aida64, cpu, cache, memory (rog certified profile 3333mhz) and cpu checked. I'm getting after 1 hr 37C on cpu, cores are fluctuating around 45-55C. My system is under water c-u, gpu and vrm. My MB Is an ASUS MXF. I have 2 360mm and 1 240mm RADs. I have a avx-1 offset.


Moar speed! Lol. I just flashed to the new bios on my apex and am also stress testing right now with realbench v2.56. Core is @ 5.2 1.35v -1 avx offset. Max temp is 61c so far 17 minutes in.


----------



## apw63

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Moar speed! Lol. I just flashed to the new bios on my apex and am also stress testing right now with realbench v2.56. Core is @ 5.2 1.35v -1 avx offset. Max temp is 61c so far 17 minutes in.


Nice! I'm working my way up slow and steady ? I have switch to IXTU it has no avx workloads, so it pushes cpu to 4.9. Aida and realbench both use avx workloads.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *apw63*
> 
> Nice! I'm working my way up slow and steady ?


goodluck:thumb:


----------



## l Nuke l

What sata port should one use if ur occupying the dimm.2?


----------



## RamGuy

I'm happy to report that my Asus ROG Maximus X Apex finally got its Intel ME firmware fixed today. After trying about everything from fpt -greset, bios flashback and whatnot I was always stuck at v0.0.0.0 with no ME functionality. Luckily with the new v0901 UEFI BIOS update it seems to force a Intel ME firmware update which re-flashed my ME Firmware back to 11.8.50.3399 and now I have successfully been able to manually update to 11.8.50.3426 without any issues.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RamGuy*
> 
> I'm happy to report that my Asus ROG Maximus X Apex finally got its Intel ME firmware fixed today. After trying about everything from fpt -greset, bios flashback and whatnot I was always stuck at v0.0.0.0 with no ME functionality. Luckily with the new v0901 UEFI BIOS update it seems to force a Intel ME firmware update which re-flashed my ME Firmware back to 11.8.50.3399 and now I have successfully been able to manually update to 11.8.50.3426 without any issues.


so updatings motherboards drivers is needed after this bios update?


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *RamGuy*
> 
> I'm happy to report that my Asus ROG Maximus X Apex finally got its Intel ME firmware fixed today. After trying about everything from fpt -greset, bios flashback and whatnot I was always stuck at v0.0.0.0 with no ME functionality. Luckily with the new v0901 UEFI BIOS update it seems to force a Intel ME firmware update which re-flashed my ME Firmware back to 11.8.50.3399 and now I have successfully been able to manually update to 11.8.50.3426 without any issues.
> 
> 
> 
> so updatings motherboards drivers is needed after this bios update?
Click to expand...

They're talking about flashing firmware into the BIOS, not updating drivers


----------



## SpeedyIV

Patching BIOS for enabling SPD programming on Intel 100 Series Chipset Family PCH

I am trying to run Thaiphoon Burner on my Maximus X Hero wifi and I am getting a message saying SPD write is disabled in BIOS. It sends me off to the support page which describes a rather involved process to overwrite specific bits in specific registers in the BIOS using UEFITool to extract items from the BIOS and edit the values using QView or HxD. They are flipping specific bits to enable SPD Write.

I am not familiar with these utilities and could not even get QView to run. I was able to follow the process and get something pretty close but not exactly what the support site showed in their example. I am not confident at all about modifying components of the BIOS at the individual bit level which is what they say is necessary. In my X99 BIOS there was an option to enable SPD Writes. I don't recall one in BIOS 0802 for the Maximus X Hero wifi. I want to get dumps of my Trident Z RGB RAM incase any corruption happens (which has been a problem with G.Skill 's RGB control utility). It's been working fine with Aura but I want a backup and the ability to rewrite the SPD data if necessary. You can also write your own XMP profile to the DIMMs if you want. On X99 it was easy. Have they locked this out for Z370? Has anyone been through this? Here is the link to what I am talking about.

http://www.softnology.biz/tips_spdwritecap2.html

Thanks


----------



## schoolofmonkey

@Jpmboy

You were right about the Apex loving B-Dies.
Make any changes to the 3200Mhz Hynix I'm using including command rate and it'll throw memory related blue screens constantly.
Stock XMP settings are fine.

Guess I'll be getting some B-Dies soon lol


----------



## DStealth

Yep get B-dies 4G are walk in the park with even non Apex boards...








4 modules...cl15 1.45v and cl16-15-15-30-300 1T 1.4v


----------



## MikelMolto

@DStealth
May I ask, how did You make Mem tweakit work with Your Hero X? What Version is this?


----------



## DStealth

Hello,
From download section of the board. Works only for reading...setting timings is no go








As for SPD read/write asked prior in BIOS menu there is setting related to is enable/disable engaged


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Hello,
> From download section of the board. Works only for reading...setting timings is no go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for SPD read/write asked prior in BIOS menu there is setting related to is enable/disable engaged


So it IS in there? I will look again. Some settings' appearance is dependent on the condition of other settings. but I don't see why SDP Write would be hidden in some cases. Maybe I just missed it. There is a LOT to look at! I will look again.

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> @Jpmboy
> 
> You were right about the Apex loving B-Dies.
> Make any changes to the 3200Mhz Hynix I'm using including command rate and it'll throw memory related blue screens constantly.
> Stock XMP settings are fine.
> 
> Guess I'll be getting some B-Dies soon lol


hynix are just different. What exact kit are you using?

@l Nuke l
you asked for these bios screenshot packs?

adaptive.zip 2007k .zip file


manual.zip 1344k .zip file

they are from a while ago, but may address your question.


----------



## tiefox

Guys, I want to change to 32gb of ram, right now I have an apex and a gskill 4266 kit running at 3700cas15 with the 8700k @ 5 ghz. Im building a custom loop and im thinking about replacing the apex with the formula and grabbing another 16gb 4266 kit since the highspeed 2x16gb are too expensive. What you guys think?


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Setting either Ring Down to disabled or Min/Max to the same values will prevent the downclocking.


Hi Praz,

If disabling the Ring Down Bin, will it cause CPU voltage to overshoot more than what I set in bios? I'm currently set on Adaptive at 1.30V.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> hynix are just different. What exact kit are you using?


The kit I'm using is tsame from my x299 setup Corsair Vengeance LPX CMK32GX4M4B3200C16 32GB (4x8GB), but only 2 of them.
One of the guys gave me all the manual settings to use on the x299 platform, didn't seem to make much of a difference on z370.


I dialed in the best I can do for 5Ghz, any lower it fails Prime95 and OCCT.
Still better than before, I had to use the same voltages for 4.9Ghz.



After a Realbench 2.56 Run, a little more heat generated because of the GPU:



Found the VRM fan bracket mounting holes, would of been nice if they put it in the damn manual.
Stuck a 120mm fan on there, cools the VRM's, Ram and Nvme drive, so win win











Only problem I'm coming up against is I can't seem to run XTU Benchmark at all, it just doesn't start.
That wouldn't be from the new BIOS fixing the ME?


----------



## KedarWolf

If peeps are getting a lot of memory errors, try blowing out your RAM slots and reseating your memory.

I did that with my electric blower, reseated the DIMMs, now when I was getting errors in the new Mem Test right away I'm getting none.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> They're talking about flashing firmware into the BIOS, not updating drivers


yeah i know i flashed to the new bios and it updated the me firmware too, but it seems like he also
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> The kit I'm using is tsame from my x299 setup Corsair Vengeance LPX CMK32GX4M4B3200C16 32GB (4x8GB), but only 2 of them.
> One of the guys gave me all the manual settings to use on the x299 platform, didn't seem to make much of a difference on z370.
> 
> 
> I dialed in the best I can do for 5Ghz, any lower it fails Prime95 and OCCT.
> Still better than before, I had to use the same voltages for 4.9Ghz.
> 
> 
> 
> After a Realbench 2.56 Run, a little more heat generated because of the GPU:
> 
> 
> 
> Found the VRM fan bracket mounting holes, would of been nice if they put it in the damn manual.
> Stuck a 120mm fan on there, cools the VRM's, Ram and Nvme drive, so win win
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only problem I'm coming up against is I can't seem to run XTU Benchmark at all, it just doesn't start.
> That wouldn't be from the new BIOS fixing the ME?


what cooler is that?


----------



## Menthol

That looks like a Corsair AIO to me, there are new drivers posted now, Chipset, MEI, Lan, sound

Monkey man I have been having similar XTU issues on Z370 and X299 not utilizing the cores fully or on X299 using 32 bit OS not at all like your screen shot.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> That looks like a Corsair AIO to me, there are new drivers posted now, Chipset, MEI, Lan, sound
> 
> Monkey man I have been having similar XTU issues on Z370 and X299 not utilizing the cores fully or on X299 using 32 bit OS not at all like your screen shot.


When you update drivers should you uninstall old ones first?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> That looks like a Corsair AIO to me, there are new drivers posted now, Chipset, MEI, Lan, sound
> 
> Monkey man I have been having similar XTU issues on Z370 and X299 not utilizing the cores fully or on X299 using 32 bit OS not at all like your screen shot.


So are you saying you're have the same problem?

The problem I'm having is that the benchmark won't actually do anything, it starts but doesn't put any load on the CPU.

I've updated to all of the new drivers as well as XTU, same problem with the Benchmark.


----------



## KedarWolf

I figured this out from someone in the memory stability thread.









If you have bad read, write and copy speeds, or if you get Merm Test errors on same profile, go into Profiles in BIOS, CTRL F2, save your settings to a .txt file.

Then F5 in BIOS, load BIOS defaults, boot into Windows, shut down. (I actually flashed the BIOS after shutting down but I think BIOS defaults only needed).

Now boot into BIOS, DON'T load your profile from the profile manager in BIOS but MANUALLY put in all your settings and timings.

I went from 60k read, 43k write and 43k copy to 61k read, 64k write, 58k copy.

And no more errors in MemTest.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> RMA it Cedar 500+ dollars board on the entry level chipset and stolts not working is just not right...stay a cople of days w/o PC would be better than have a defective unit you have to sell at some point...


It's not the board but the CPU.

Popped the CPU into another system, different board, same issue.

I'm just waiting on an i3-8100 placeholder so I can RMA the CHIP.

Hopefully, I'll have better luck on the new chip. Not delidded I need 1.32v for 4.9GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache and can only do Mode 1 2T on the memory no matter how I tweak it.


----------



## DStealth

Ah this makes sence...good luck with the new CPU then this one sounds like a dud .
As for memory don't hope for 4+Ghz 1T with 4 modules ...better reduce the frequency or stick with 2T...They just won't stick together with such combination.
I have better results with ~4Ghz 1T Cl16 even from 4100 2T CL15...so the Voltage required just not worth...IMC are just weak with B-dies fully occupied








Edit: As for XTU benchmark i wrote i have issues a couple of pages back...good to see it's not only me and trying reinstalling OS and etc...


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Ah this makes sence...good luck with the new CPU then this one sounds like a dud .
> As for memory don't hope for 4+Ghz 1T with 4 modules ...better reduce the frequency or stick with 2T...They just won't stick together with such combination.
> I have better results with ~4Ghz 1T Cl16 even from 4100 2T CL15...so the Voltage required just not worth...IMC are just weak with B-dies fully occupied
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: As for XTU benchmark i wrote i have issues a couple of pages back...good to see it's not only me and trying reinstalling OS and etc...


Can't even do 1T with only two DIMMs in.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> So are you saying you're have the same problem?
> 
> The problem I'm having is that the benchmark won't actually do anything, it starts but doesn't put any load on the CPU.
> 
> I've updated to all of the new drivers as well as XTU, same problem with the Benchmark.


On my R6A it's utilizing about 30 to 40% max so real low score, I installed Win 10 32 bit and exactly like you 00%

My M10A is off the bench, I got acceptable score but not where it should be, the new bios is not installed, not sure what I am missing
I thought it was me doing something wrong so you gave me a little hope it's something else, not that that helps you, hoping someone can shead some light


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> When you update drivers should you uninstall old ones first?


I typically do not, just install over the current unless I am having some issue before updating and want to clean it out first, then I uninstall and run CCleaner to clean up registry


----------



## schoolofmonkey

@Menthol

Fixed it.

BIOS Flashback 0901 then a Clean install of Windows 10.
Working as it should again


----------



## Menthol

Good news, I have been doing some 3D benching on X299 and probably need a fresh OS install to get things back to a starting point and retest


----------



## l Nuke l

@jpmboy on your 4400c19 kit @4266c17 what do you have your DRAM RTL INIT value set to in bios? And what about twrpre, trdpre, trefix9 and oref_ri?


----------



## kevindd992002

Just got my Code X, it's ALIVE!!!



I got this from B&H. The only disappointment I have is that it has a minor dent on the top VRM heatsink as shown in the pictures below:





For such an expensive board ($319.99) I want it to be close to perfect. I bought this when I was in the US the past few weeks and I'm back in the Philippines. I won't be able to RMA it back as shipping costs will be very high. What do you guys think?


----------



## Menthol

Damn that Code is a fine looking piece of hardware, that little flaw if you could call it that is nothing IMO and you can't send it back anyway
Build It


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Damn that Code is a fine looking piece of hardware, that little flaw if you could call it that is nothing IMO and you can't send it back anyway
> Build It


Yeah, it's just my OCD kicking in. I want things to be near perfect as possible


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> @jpmboy on your 4400c19 kit @4266c17 what do you have your DRAM RTL INIT value set to in bios? And what about twrpre, trdpre, trefix9 and oref_ri?


just load the preset Raja has in there for 4133, and adjust from there. (2x8GB New Samsumg)

171229075723.zip 506k .zip file

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Yeah, it's just my OCD kicking in. *I want things to be near perfect as possible*


that looks to be as near to perfect as possible.


----------



## ChaosAD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Can't even do 1T with only two DIMMs in.


I also have issues with 1T and two sticks only. The max i can boot is 3866 with 1T, even at 4000 no matter the voltages is a no go. Is this weak IMC or the board?


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChaosAD*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Can't even do 1T with only two DIMMs in.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I also have issues with 1T and two sticks only. The max i can boot is 3866 with 1T, even at 4000 no matter the voltages is a no go. Is this weak IMC or the board?
Click to expand...

Weak IMC likely.

I've tried this CPU in three different boards and is in a Maximus X Formula now, I'm sure it's a weak IMC.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChaosAD*
> 
> I also have issues with 1T and two sticks only. The max i can boot is 3866 with 1T, even at 4000 no matter the voltages is a no go. Is this weak IMC or the board?


what board.. what sticks? (update your sig rig plz







)


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> So it IS in there? I will look again. Some settings' appearance is dependent on the condition of other settings. but I don't see why SDP Write would be hidden in some cases. Maybe I just missed it. There is a LOT to look at! I will look again.
> 
> Thanks


Inside Timing control at the end is the setting here:


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> just load the preset Raja has in there for 4133, and adjust from there. (2x8GB New Samsumg)
> 
> 171229075723.zip 506k .zip file
> ]
> Oh damn didnt know he had a profile in there. Def gonna check it out when i get home from work. How much voltage do you guys find that your adding when overclocking cache to maintain stability? My chip is stable at 5.1ghz with 1.365vcore with cache left on auto(4.4). I wanna set cache to 4.8 think ill need more then 1.375vcore?


----------



## l Nuke l

Oh damn didnt know he had a profile in there. Def gonna check it out when i get home from work. How much voltage do you guys find that your adding when overclocking cache to maintain stability? My chip is stable at 5.1ghz with 1.365vcore with cache left on auto(4.4). I wanna set cache to 4.8 think ill need more then 1.375vcore?[/quote]


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Oh damn didnt know he had a profile in there. Def gonna check it out when i get home from work. How much voltage do you guys find that your adding when overclocking cache to maintain stability? My chip is stable at 5.1ghz with 1.365vcore with cache left on auto(4.4). *I wanna set cache to 4.8 think ill need more then 1.375vcore*?


only way to know is to try.


----------



## ChaosAD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what board.. what sticks? (update your sig rig plz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Asus Hero X with GSkill 2x8Gb Trident Z RGB 3600 16-16-16-36.

You are right i forgot to update sig


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChaosAD*
> 
> Asus Hero X with GSkill 2x8Gb Trident Z RGB 3600 16-16-16-36.
> 
> You are right i forgot to update sig


if the Hero has memory presets, load Raja's 4133 settings (for 2x8GB New Samsung B-Die). Set VSa to 1.25 to 1.275, and Vccio to 1.25-ish (shouldn;t need higher). Will it successfully POST back to Bios? If yes, out a USB stick in any port, and in the dram settings menu scroll to RTLs, hit F12 and post that SS here. lets have a look at how it is training.

Also, always best to do a clrcmos before a ram adjustment like this.


----------



## ChaosAD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if the Hero has memory presets, load Raja's 4133 settings (for 2x8GB New Samsung B-Die). Set VSa to 1.25 to 1.275, and Vccio to 1.25-ish (shouldn;t need higher). Will it successfully POST back to Bios? If yes, out a USB stick in any port, and in the dram settings menu scroll to RTLs, hit F12 and post that SS here. lets have a look at how it is training.
> 
> Also, always best to do a clrcmos before a ram adjustment like this.


There is only one preset for 2x8GB New Samsung B-Die for 4000Mhz. If i try to set memory manualy it doesnt post even at 4100.


----------



## nyk20z3

Does any one have the proper safe settings to push a 8700K to 5.0ghz?, I am running a Apex X and would like to see what the chip can do but i am no OC expert.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> Does any one have the proper safe settings to push a 8700K to 5.0ghz?, I am running a Apex X and would like to see what the chip can do but i am no OC expert.


Do a custom search of thread with my username, I have all the BIOS screens needed posted for 4.9GHZ, but you'll need between 1.32v to 1.35v for 5.0GHZ stable I'm sure, rest would be the same.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChaosAD*
> 
> There is only one preset for 2x8GB New Samsung B-Die for 4000Mhz. If i try to set memory manualy it doesnt post even at 4100.




1,45V boot, 1.425 eventual, PLL bandwidth 3 (for 5.2 on the core) VSA 1.275, vccio 1.25. make sure you clear out any previou8s settings in the ram timings (best to clrcmos


----------



## chibi

Hey JP - what does the PLL Bandwidth setting do?


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> Does any one have the proper safe settings to push a 8700K to 5.0ghz?, I am running a Apex X and would like to see what the chip can do but i am no OC expert.
> 
> 
> 
> Do a custom search of thread with my username, I have all the BIOS screens needed posted for 4.9GHZ, but you'll need between 1.32v to 1.35v for 5.0GHZ stable I'm sure, rest would be the same.
Click to expand...

Only thing I missed is you want to do PLL Bandwidth at 3.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Hey JP - what does the PLL Bandwidth setting do?


Phasing of domains. You only need to adjust this when pushing clocks. Auto should work fine, however, it will run quite high (Pll oc voltage in hwi) when you crank things up. Can help with high ram freq and high core/cache clocks.
Just FYI, for 5.0, I run PLL = 0


----------



## ChaosAD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 1,45V boot, 1.425 eventual, PLL bandwidth 3 (for 5.2 on the core) VSA 1.275, vccio 1.25. make sure you clear out any previou8s settings in the ram timings (best to clrcmos


Tried your settings. 1T doesnt boot even at 4000, i get 55 q code. It booted once at 4100 17-18-18-28 2T, but after trying 4133 and 4200 didnt boot again. Anything over 4000, even 4100 2T, gave me a 49 q code.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Inside Timing control at the end is the setting here:


Well there it is. Thank you! I guess I did not scroll down far enough. What confuses me now is that Thaiphoon Burner opens with a message that SMBus addresses 50h - 57h are disabled by BIOS setting. I suspect if I go enable SPD Write, that problem would no longer exist. The thing is, he sent me an email explaining that Intel has decided to lock SPD Writes in the BIOS and all the MOBO manufacturers are complying. He documented a procedure to extract portions of the BIOS and actually go into a hex editor and flip the necessary bits, then integrate the modified code back into the BIOS. Kind of scary stuff (to me). Anyway, he actually downloaded my MOBO's latest BIOS (0802) and tried it. He emailed me and said it would not work because "_when flashing a modified BIOS on the ASUS motherboard. ASUS flashers do not program entire BIOS region, only a part of it. So, I believe it will be really hard to enable SPD Write capability on your motherboard_."

The procedure is documented in the Tips & Tricks area of the Thaiphoon Burner website. Here is the link if anyone is interested.

http://www.softnology.biz/tips_spdwritecap.html

From the aritcle -

"_With release of 8 Series/C220 Series Chipset Family Platform Controller Hub (PCH) Intel introduce a great surprise for all of us. Now writes to SMBus addresses 50h - 57h are disabled by default via SMBus Host Controller registers. The "SPD Write Disable" feature is implemented within Intel 9 Series Chipset Family PCH and X99 Chipset PCH as well. This means Intel does not want SPD to be programmed any more. In some cases it was the only way to increase the memory bandwidth on notebooks. Unfortunately, software can't temporarily bypass this restriction in Windows session. The only working solution is to modify BIOS._

This guy knows a LOT about RAM, JDEC Standards, SPD Data, XMP Profiles, etc. I don't understand why he is telling me that Intel disables SPD Write in all 8th generation CPUs, and he even tried to get around it and couldn't. Then you post a screen shot of DRAM SPD Write Enable, clear as day. I am missing something. Next step is to go try it which I will do as soon as I am in front the rig.

Thanks !


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChaosAD*
> 
> Tried your settings. 1T doesnt boot even at 4000, i get 55 q code. It booted once at 4100 17-18-18-28 2T, but after trying 4133 and 4200 didnt boot again. Anything over 4000, even 4100 2T, gave me a 49 q code.


My 3600 16-16-16 kit doesn't clock up to 4000 with tight timings and 1t either but it is a 4 stick kit. It is as much or more dependent on your CPU as anything.

The Hero doesn't have as many presets as the Apex







, and so goes down the line up. If your not good with memory like me the high end board is worth every cent and then some. But even they cannot make up for a weak Chip
But my Hero does like my 2x8 4133 RGB kit at XMP, last RGB kit for me though, these LED's are bright and do not turn off during sleep mode like the motherboard LED's


----------



## KedarWolf

I got my Dr. Delid today.

I paid for regular post and they shipped it the next day.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChaosAD*
> 
> Tried your settings. 1T doesnt boot even at 4000, i get 55 q code. It booted once at 4100 17-18-18-28 2T, but after trying 4133 and 4200 didnt boot again. Anything over 4000, even 4100 2T, gave me a 49 q code.


If you can boot 3900 1T stick with it tried many combinations and 4100 2t is not faster...as reducing some subs is needed also as cranking MB voltages also.
Had Spi32m runs 4100 16-15-15 2T and 3900+ same timings 1T and times were identical...


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Just got my Code X, it's ALIVE!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got this from B&H. The only disappointment I have is that it has a minor dent on the top VRM heatsink as shown in the pictures below:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For such an expensive board ($319.99) I want it to be close to perfect. I bought this when I was in the US the past few weeks and I'm back in the Philippines. I won't be able to RMA it back as shipping costs will be very high. What do you guys think?


Congrats! Looking at getting one of these. I don' think the dent is a big deal. Air cool it with a D15 and you'll never see it









Please keep us posted on your impressions!

.


----------



## Bluecow003

Just ran Realbench 2.56 for an hour with 4.8GHz at 1.31 volts (adaptive, no offset, auto LLC, used the Kaby Lake guide steps). Temperatures were typically between 70-72C with a couple very short spikes to 77C over the course of the hour. 4.8 failed with 1.29 volts after about 30+ minutes, so that's when I tried 1.31 volts. My goal is to find a 24/7 overclock. Should I keep going for 4.9 (or higher)? How high should I be willing to push the voltage? I haven't applied the XMP to the memory yet. First trying to get a stable CPU overclock and then I'll move onto the memory.


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> Congrats! Looking at getting one of these. I don' think the dent is a big deal. Air cool it with a D15 and you'll never see it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please keep us posted on your impressions!
> 
> .


Thanks. I will!


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Thanks. I will!


Nice to see your build is finally starting to happen, congrats


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Nice to see your build is finally starting to happen, congrats


Yeah. That's more than half a year of waiting for all parts to be complete


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bluecow003*
> 
> Just ran Realbench 2.56 for an hour with 4.8GHz at 1.31 volts (adaptive, no offset, auto LLC, used the Kaby Lake guide steps). Temperatures were typically between 70-72C with a couple very short spikes to 77C over the course of the hour. 4.8 failed with 1.29 volts after about 30+ minutes, so that's when I tried 1.31 volts. My goal is to find a 24/7 overclock. Should I keep going for 4.9 (or higher)? How high should I be willing to push the voltage? I haven't applied the XMP to the memory yet. First trying to get a stable CPU overclock and then I'll move onto the memory.


Sounds promising to me. I am on a 4790k @ 4,.8 GHz / 1.28v VID adaptive with similar temperature.

What CL/frequency memory do you have and what is XMP for it?


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Yeah. That's more than half a year of waiting for all parts to be complete


Ouch, what if something was DOA? Or did you buy them all at once?


----------



## kevindd992002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> Ouch, what if something was DOA? Or did you buy them all at once?


Nope, I bought them separately. Most of the WC parts were bought last May. It was Coffee Lake's fault why I decided to wait for such a long time









I also thought about the DOA issue also. I'm just praying everything works as they should. Wish me luck!


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kevindd992002*
> 
> Nope, I bought them separately. Most of the WC parts were bought last May. It was Coffee Lake's fault why I decided to wait for such a long time
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I also thought about the DOA issue also. I'm just praying everything works as they should. Wish me luck!


Good luck!


----------



## fvbarc

Hi, two questions:
Does any one have the proper settings for gskill f4-4000c18d-16gtz? i'm not able to run them at 4000mhz.
Do you know why in the 29/12 /2017 asus ROG strix z370-F gaming qualified vendor list there are no more 4000mhz memories







?
Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fvbarc*
> 
> Hi, two questions:
> Does any one have the proper settings for gskill f4-4000c18d-16gtz? i'm not able to run them at 4000mhz.
> Do you know why in the 29/12 /2017 asus ROG strix z370-F gaming qualified vendor list there are no more 4000mhz memories
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ?
> Thanks


Do a custom search with my username, I posted 4000 settings a while back.

But I'm on 3200 b-dies.

And I have 4133 with BIOS screenshots.

4133 GSAT stable screenshots.









4x8GB 3200 b-dies.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!




















4133MHZ_setting.txt 74k .txt file


----------



## fvbarc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Do a custom search with my username, I posted 4000 settings a while back.
> 
> But I'm on 3200 b-dies.
> 
> And I have 4133 with BIOS screenshots.
> 
> 4133 GSAT stable screenshots.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4x8GB 3200 b-dies.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4133MHZ_setting.txt 74k .txt file


Thank you!
why in the 29/12 /2017 asus ROG strix z370-F gaming qualified vendor list there are no more 4000mhz memories mad.gif


----------



## bl4ckdot

Received my Formula X. Is it normal that the box came without any seal ?
What were your experiences of unbox these ROG boards ?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Received my Formula X. Is it normal that the box came without any seal ?
> What were your experiences of unbox these ROG boards ?


The box doesn't have a seal. I bought my apex at a local shop. I have no doubt it was new.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Received my Formula X. Is it normal that the box came without any seal ?
> What were your experiences of unbox these ROG boards ?


Mine didn't come with a seal, perfectly normal.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> The box doesn't have a seal. I bought my apex at a local shop. I have no doubt it was new.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Mine didn't come with a seal, perfectly normal.


Thank you both. I was a bit worried.


----------



## Bluecow003

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> Sounds promising to me. I am on a 4790k @ 4,.8 GHz / 1.28v VID adaptive with similar temperature.
> 
> What CL/frequency memory do you have and what is XMP for it?


The ram is DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600), Timing 16-18-18-36, Voltage 1.35V. Nothing too extreme.


----------



## Bluecow003

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> Received my Formula X. Is it normal that the box came without any seal ?
> What were your experiences of unbox these ROG boards ?


Do you mean like a plastic wrap around the box or the plastic cover inside the box? My Maximus X Code didn't have any plastic wrap around the box (ordered from Newegg's first shipment batch in early December), but there was a plastic cover inside the box protecting the motherboard.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bluecow003*
> 
> Do you mean like a plastic wrap around the box or the plastic cover inside the box? My Maximus X Code didn't have any plastic wrap around the box (ordered from Newegg's first shipment batch in early December), but there was a plastic cover inside the box protecting the motherboard.


Ok thanks. It was the same as you.


----------



## Bluecow003

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bluecow003*
> 
> Just ran Realbench 2.56 for an hour with 4.8GHz at 1.31 volts (adaptive, no offset, auto LLC, used the Kaby Lake guide steps). Temperatures were typically between 70-72C with a couple very short spikes to 77C over the course of the hour. 4.8 failed with 1.29 volts after about 30+ minutes, so that's when I tried 1.31 volts. My goal is to find a 24/7 overclock. Should I keep going for 4.9 (or higher)? How high should I be willing to push the voltage? I haven't applied the XMP to the memory yet. First trying to get a stable CPU overclock and then I'll move onto the memory.


Well it didn't take me very long to find my answer. Tried 4.9GHz and Realbench would fail after 5 minutes even with 1.37v (adaptive). Temps were in the upper 70's. Doesn't seem like it's worth it to get try to get 4.9GHz stable without going to more extreme measures like delidding, which doesn't interest me. Guess I'll focus on making sure the ram is stable and dialing in the low load settings.


----------



## ChaosAD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> If you can boot 3900 1T stick with it tried many combinations and 4100 2t is not faster...as reducing some subs is needed also as cranking MB voltages also.
> Had Spi32m runs 4100 16-15-15 2T and 3900+ same timings 1T and times were identical...


Managed to boot once at 3900 1T but after a reboot it didnt make it twice. I also make it in windows and also run aida bench at 4100 2T but also after a reboot in never made it twice. How is this possible? The best settings i can get with no issues is 4000 17-16-16-36 2T. As nothing else seems to work for me i guess i ll stick here and tighten some. Hope i can do 60+ read/60+ write/lower than 40ms latency and i m happy, sort of


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bluecow003*
> 
> Well it didn't take me very long to find my answer. Tried 4.9GHz and Realbench would fail after 5 minutes even with 1.37v (adaptive). Temps were in the upper 70's. Doesn't seem like it's worth it to get try to get 4.9GHz stable without going to more extreme measures like delidding, which doesn't interest me. Guess I'll focus on making sure the ram is stable and dialing in the low load settings.


Stop using adaptive voltage to dial in your overclock use manual volts to stress test.


----------



## Bluecow003

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Stop using adaptive voltage to dial in your overclock use manual volts to stress test.


How would that really help though? When I set the 1.37v using adaptive, sure, under load the CPU was only getting say 1.31v (and the heat associated with 1.31v). If I use manual (and LLC), then I could theoretically manually set the voltage to 1.31v and get the same results as the adaptive setting at 1.37v. It doesn't really change how much voltage the CPU is getting under load though. Both settings would use 1.31v. Whether using adaptive or manual, the required amount of voltage under load to get stability will be the same, right? In other words, when using adaptive, even though I set it to 1.37v, it's not like I'm getting the heat produced from 1.37v since it's lower than that under load. Using manual wouldn't change how much voltage under load is required to be stable.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Ok best LLC settings.

I'm doing the out of the ordinary LLC configuration currently.
Now my 5Ghz oc needs 1.392v to be OCCT stable, so I've used LLC 6 to allow the 1.392v when under heavy loads like OCCT.
I set 1.360v manually, which gives me the 1.360v on light loads, but fire up OCCT/Realbench/x265 etc and it'll use the 1.392v.

I know it's not the standard use of LLC, but it's working, it keeps temps lower in gaming as I don't need to set 1.4v manually for every load.


----------



## Rowethren

My LLC seems to act very differently. If I have it on 6 with 1.360v on the core at idle or in low load games it over shoots up to between 1.392-1.4 but under load like realbench it goes to 1.360. That seems to be the complete opposite of what you experience...


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rowethren*
> 
> My LLC seems to act very differently. If I have it on 6 with 1.360v on the core at idle or in low load games it over shoots up to between 1.392-1.4 but under load like realbench it goes to 1.360. That seems to be the complete opposite of what you experience...


I'm running a Apex.
Never saw that happen before.

The Apex is a little different to what I've used in the past.

Even on the Strix-F there was a LLC level that kept the voltage to what you actually entered.
On the Apex LLC 5 goes under, LLC 6 over shoots.

I've dialed in 5Ghz with no AVX offset, whats the best way to test the AVX stability?


----------



## CRJ84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Ok best LLC settings.
> 
> I'm doing the out of the ordinary LLC configuration currently.
> Now my 5Ghz oc needs 1.392v to be OCCT stable, so I've used LLC 6 to allow the 1.392v when under heavy loads like OCCT.
> I set 1.360v manually, which gives me the 1.360v on light loads, but fire up OCCT/Realbench/x265 etc and it'll use the 1.392v.
> 
> I know it's not the standard use of LLC, but it's working, it keeps temps lower in gaming as I don't need to set 1.4v manually for every load.


I am pretty sure it is just the extra voltage the cpu is giving when doing AVX instructions. I have the same problem, everytime AVX instructions are run it gives it way to much voltage, only way to stop this is run manual vcore i think?

I tried adaptive and offset, both are doing this, but when setting manual voltage it will stay at the same voltage under load AVX and non-AVX.
I am using LLC 6 on Hero X.


----------



## MikelMolto

Adaptive is a NO go for me, because You can never get a lover VCore then the CPU VID. Even You set VCore to 1,000V and Your VID is 1,3V he will ignore Your setting and will give 1,3V.

Offset works and I have this running right now but I am not happy with it.
Offset will need a little more VCore then Manual and You will loose some performance. That the MB reduce the VCore in idle, the Min. Ringbus must be in Auto. My max. Ringbus is set to 4500. If I use offset the Ringbus will not go higher then 4300. I ask my self why? For me this is a bug.

Last Options is the Manual Mode and here the VCore will not go down in idle but You will have the best performance and can adjust the VCore very nice. Different from Adaptive and Offset in Manual the Mainboard don't care what the CPU ask on VCore and only will give on VCore to the CPU what You have set in the Bios.In this case You have the full control.

LLC6 is absolutely wrong, because You need and want this VCore droop under Load.
In my Opinion LLC 4 is perfect and LLC 5 can be accepted as long as Your VCore is not too high under load. Yes in Manual You will have a higher idle VCore with lower LLC but who cares. I don't care and definitely the CPU don't care. Important is the VCore under Load!


----------



## Batman1982

Llc 5 or 4 is ok in my opinion.
But i don't know what is better.

I only Gaming with my rig.

In Prime my drop is to 1,328 Volt. In Idle with Llc4 1,392 with llc 5 1,360

When i use Prime the drop is ok, but when i Gaming my Voltage stays in Idle or a bit lower ( 1Step)
So there is the question what is better 1,360 or 1,392 in Gaming.

I use Apex with 8700k @5ghz


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikelMolto*
> 
> Adaptive is a NO go for me, because You can never get a lover VCore then the CPU VID. Even You set VCore to 1,000V and Your VID is 1,3V he will ignore Your setting and will give 1,3V.
> 
> Offset works and I have this running right now but I am not happy with it.
> Offset will need a little more VCore then Manual and You will loose some performance. That the MB reduce the VCore in idle, the Min. Ringbus must be in Auto. My max. Ringbus is set to 4500. If I use offset the Ringbus will not go higher then 4300. I ask my self why? For me this is a bug.
> 
> Last Options is the Manual Mode and here the VCore will not go down in idle but You will have the best performance and can adjust the VCore very nice. Different from Adaptive and Offset in Manual the Mainboard don't care what the CPU ask on VCore and only will give on VCore to the CPU what You have set in the Bios.In this case You have the full control.
> 
> LLC6 is absolutely wrong, because You need and want this VCore droop under Load.
> In my Opinion LLC 4 is perfect and LLC 5 can be accepted as long as Your VCore is not too high under load. Yes in Manual You will have a higher idle VCore with lower LLC but who cares. I don't care and definitely the CPU don't care. Important is the VCore under Load!


LLC 4 gives me a full 60 - 70mv drop.
So if I set 1.39v in BIOS it'll drop to 1.328v under heavy load, which as you'd expect not pass anything..


----------



## CRJ84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikelMolto*
> 
> Adaptive is a NO go for me, because You can never get a lover VCore then the CPU VID. Even You set VCore to 1,000V and Your VID is 1,3V he will ignore Your setting and will give 1,3V.
> 
> Offset works and I have this running right now but I am not happy with it.
> Offset will need a little more VCore then Manual and You will loose some performance. That the MB reduce the VCore in idle, the Min. Ringbus must be in Auto. My max. Ringbus is set to 4500. If I use offset the Ringbus will not go higher then 4300. I ask my self why? For me this is a bug.
> 
> Last Options is the Manual Mode and here the VCore will not go down in idle but You will have the best performance and can adjust the VCore very nice. Different from Adaptive and Offset in Manual the Mainboard don't care what the CPU ask on VCore and only will give on VCore to the CPU what You have set in the Bios.In this case You have the full control.
> 
> LLC6 is absolutely wrong, because You need and want this VCore droop under Load.
> In my Opinion LLC 4 is perfect and LLC 5 can be accepted as long as Your VCore is not too high under load. Yes in Manual You will have a higher idle VCore with lower LLC but who cares. I don't care and definitely the CPU don't care. Important is the VCore under Load!


I am using adaptive 1.28 vcore 5 ghz clock and LLC6 and avx-2 so I am getting 1.28 under load both avx and non avx and the vcore goes down when idle, so everything seems to be working with adaptive voltage.


----------



## KedarWolf

@Jpmboy

When you get a chance can you post BIOS screens for your CPU, memory and all related OC settings?

I'm pretty much winging it with what I figure is good with no idea if I'm doing everything right.









I brb, going to post screens of my settings from BIOS.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## KedarWolf

4x8GB 4133MHZ

KedarWolf--i7 8700K Not Delidded VCore---1.34V (@4.9/[email protected]6v (BIOS)---VCCIO 1.20v (BIOS)---SA 1.2375V (BIOS)---HCI MemTest 1000%

Samsung b-die CL14 3200MHZ G.SKILL Ripjaws 5 F4-3200C14Q-32GVK


----------



## Emmett

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> 4x8GB 4133MHZ
> 
> KedarWolf--i7 8700K Not Delidded VCore---1.34V (@4.9/[email protected] (BIOS)---VCCIO 1.20v (BIOS)---SA 1.2375V (BIOS)---HCI MemTest 1000%
> 
> Samsung b-die CL14 3200MHZ G.SKILL Ripjaws 5 F4-3200C14Q-32GVK


I have Trident Z F4-3200 14Q-64GTZ

I am running 2 of the sticks in the apex for 32G total.

Do you think I could try your settings above even though I have 16G per stick?

Im mostly worried about 1.46V to the memory,


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Emmett*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> 4x8GB 4133MHZ
> 
> KedarWolf--i7 8700K Not Delidded VCore---1.34V (@4.9/[email protected] (BIOS)---VCCIO 1.20v (BIOS)---SA 1.2375V (BIOS)---HCI MemTest 1000%
> 
> Samsung b-die CL14 3200MHZ G.SKILL Ripjaws 5 F4-3200C14Q-32GVK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have Trident Z F4-3200 14Q-64GTZ
> 
> I am running 2 of the sticks in the apex for 32G total.
> 
> Do you think I could try your settings above even though I have 16G per stick?
> 
> I'm mostly worried about 1.46V to the memory,
Click to expand...

I've read under 1.5v is fine but some say 1.45v is as high as you want to go.

Try my settings at 1.45v.









And also try 1T instead of 2T in RAM timings.









BIOS screens.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## DStealth

With dual rank 16gb modules forget such speeds







Aim for 3400-3600 1T as low timings as possible








Kedar your Aida latency is very high should be in 35-37ns region with such settings. What RTLs and IOLs are you running ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> With dual rank 16gb modules forget such speeds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aim for 3400-3600 1T as low timings as possible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kedar your Aida latency is very high should be in 35-37ns region with such settings. What RTLs and IOLs are you running ?


I'm pretty sure that kit is a single rank newer b-die kit but I may be wrong.


----------



## Emmett

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I've read under 1.5v is fine but some say 1.45v is as high as you want to go.
> 
> Try my settings at 1.45v.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And also try 1T instead of 2T in RAM timings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BIOS screens.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> With dual rank 16gb modules forget such speeds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aim for 3400-3600 1T as low timings as possible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kedar your Aida latency is very high should be in 35-37ns region with such settings. What RTLs and IOLs are you running ?


Ok, Thank you both.

Guess I'll stick with the 3600 1T I have been running.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> With dual rank 16gb modules forget such speeds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aim for 3400-3600 1T as low timings as possible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kedar your Aida latency is very high should be in 35-37ns region with such settings. What RTLs and IOLs are you running ?


I can only run 2T on this CPU, I'll check my RTLs etc next time I'm in BIOS.

Write latency is 13 though.


----------



## Emmett

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I'm pretty sure that kit is a single rank newer b-die kit but I may be wrong.


I purchased this kit just over a year ago from newegg I'm pretty sure it was under $500 too.

So it's likely old b-die?


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Emmett*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I'm pretty sure that kit is a single rank newer b-die kit but I may be wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> I purchased this kit just over a year ago from newegg I'm pretty sure it was under $500 too.
> 
> So it's likely old b-die?
Click to expand...

It'll be newer b-die I'm sure and it'll say in AIDA64 if it's single rank or double rank.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I can only run 2T on this CPU, I'll check my RTLs etc next time I'm in BIOS.
> 
> Write latency is 13 though.


Your asking a lot out of a 3200mhz kit. My Hero won't do 1T at these speeds either, the Apex though will at even tighter timings


----------



## Emmett

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> It'll be newer b-die I'm sure and it'll say in AIDA64 if it's single rank or double rank.


Aida 64 under SPD shows (2 ranks, 16 banks)


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> With dual rank 16gb modules forget such speeds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aim for 3400-3600 1T as low timings as possible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kedar your Aida latency is very high should be in 35-37ns region with such settings. What RTLs and IOLs are you running ?


Remember,

I'm running 4x8GB.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Remember,
> 
> I'm running 4x8GB.


I know , i have 4x8 too even Asrock 3700-3800 2T does 37-38ns. Now on Asus hero with 3900-4000 1T have 35-36. You should be in this region too with 4100 2T. Over 40 is just not right.
69/71 for RTLs is very high maybe this is the reason try lowering in 60/62 range for this frequency. Also your tRAS is high for 17-17 optimal would be 36 or lower if possible.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Remember,
> 
> I'm running 4x8GB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know , i have 4x8 too even Asrock 3700-3800 2T does 37-38ns. Now on Asus hero with 3900-4000 1T have 35-36. You should be in this region too with 4100 2T. Over 40 is just not right.
> 69/71 for RTLs is very high maybe this is the reason try lowering in 60/62 range for this frequency. Also your tRAS is high for 17-17 optimal would be 36 or lower if possible.
Click to expand...

Edit: Like X99 tRAS =+ 2 to -2 tRCD+tRP I assume.

You don't manually adjust the RTLs. If you do your PC will not boot.

To lower the RTLs you lower the CHA IO_Latency_offset.



Here's with my IO_Latency at 14.


----------



## KedarWolf




----------



## l Nuke l

Is it possible to damage mobo if you touch a mouse or keyboard with static build up? just went to touch my mouse and shocked myself and the mouse lol


----------



## TurricanM3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Setting either Ring Down to disabled or Min/Max to the same values will prevent the downclocking.


so is it 100% safe to disable Ring Down in terms of the "overvolting" warning in the uefi when using manual voltages for VCore/IO/SA. Thanks Praz!


----------



## MikelMolto

This is also my Question.
I have Min. CPU Cache Ratio in Auto (what is 8?)
and Max. CPU Cache Ratio at 45.
I use Adaptive Voltage but my Ringbus will not go higher then 4300 in Windows. Should be 4500 under load!

Does Ring Down disabled give me the Ringbus 4500 in Windows and most of all is it safe?


----------



## DStealth

It's safe mate I run 5300+ Cache 24/7








Setting min and max with the same value gives this exact value in OS


----------



## TurricanM3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> It's safe mate I run 5300+ Cache 24/7
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Setting min and max with the same value gives this exact value in OS


But that was not the question. Min. / Max. is safe yes but what about disabling Ring Down Bin.

Aida for me:


CPU 5200 / Cache 5000


----------



## vonPelz

Any recommendations regarding adaptive voltage, SVID behaviour and LLC?
I'm currently running 4.8GHz, SVID behaviour best, adaptive offset auto, turbo voltage below SVID, LLC default (disabled).
This results in 1.216v during x264 encoding. However, this setup is not stable, system crashes usually about 2 hours in.

What's the recommended way to stabilize? Changing SVID behaviour, LLC or turbo voltage? I suppose upping the turbo voltage would be the most conservative... But I'm wondering if I should change LLC or SVID behaviour instead.


----------



## DStealth

Answered to the post before mine. Yes it's safe to disable down bin.
This Apex boards are evil ...the score you have for just "CPU 5200 / Cache 5000" and 18-19-19 2t is just ridiculously/good/








Would you mind post your other settings for this result


----------



## renhanxue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vonPelz*
> 
> Any recommendations regarding adaptive voltage, SVID behaviour and LLC?
> I'm currently running 4.8GHz, SVID behaviour best, adaptive offset auto, turbo voltage below SVID, LLC default (disabled).
> This results in 1.216v during x264 encoding. However, this setup is not stable, system crashes usually about 2 hours in.
> 
> What's the recommended way to stabilize? Changing SVID behaviour, LLC or turbo voltage? I suppose upping the turbo voltage would be the most conservative... But I'm wondering if I should change LLC or SVID behaviour instead.


I'd try setting LLC to 4 or so first, that's very easy and will bump your voltage under load a little bit. I'm not sure when it'd be appropriate to change the SVID behavior; wouldn't it be easier to just increase the manually configured adaptive voltage instead?

I've also heard various more or less confusing claims that adaptive is broken in some way in the 0802 BIOS for the Maximus X boards, but I haven't understood exactly how except that it supposedly provides less voltage than it should. I've only just started out experimenting with my own Hero board and haven't really gotten off the ground yet.


----------



## vonPelz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renhanxue*
> 
> I'd try setting LLC to 4 or so first, that's very easy and will bump your voltage under load a little bit. I'm not sure when it'd be appropriate to change the SVID behavior; wouldn't it be easier to just increase the manually configured adaptive voltage instead?
> 
> I've also heard various more or less confusing claims that adaptive is broken in some way in the 0802 BIOS for the Maximus X boards, but I haven't understood exactly how except that it supposedly provides less voltage than it should. I've only just started out experimenting with my own Hero board and haven't really gotten off the ground yet.


I believe all three options will increase load voltage. But upping LLC and/or SVID behaviour will also affect non-turbo volts I think, and LLC will counter vdroop (for better or worse?).

So why use LLC instead of just upping the turbo voltage? Won't one have better control of the resulting load voltage with the latter option? I see everyone using LLC in their OCs, but I fail to see the immediate benefit...

As for adaptive being broken, changing SVID behaviour to best, IA AC & DC load to 0.0.1 and LLC to default worked for me (Z370-E). Otherwise the voltage was way higher than needed at load. But it sounds strange if the Maximus boards are providing less voltage than expected...


----------



## renhanxue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vonPelz*
> 
> I believe all three options will increase load voltage. But upping LLC and/or SVID behaviour will also affect non-turbo volts I think, and LLC will counter vdroop (for better or worse?).
> 
> So why use LLC instead of just upping the turbo voltage? Won't one have better control of the resulting load voltage with the latter option? I see everyone using LLC in their OCs, but I fail to see the immediate benefit...
> 
> As for adaptive being broken, changing SVID behaviour to best, IA AC & DC load to 0.0.1 and LLC to default worked for me (Z370-E). Otherwise the voltage was way higher than needed at load. But it sounds strange if the Maximus boards are providing less voltage than expected...


There's a difference between turbo and turbo. Your CPU can be clocked at 4.8GHz without actually _doing_ much and without consuming much power at all (try setting the power management in Windows to "high performance" and I think it'll stay clocked at max turbo all the time). Using the turbo voltage will raise that "idle but clocked up" voltage, but you don't really need that. When the CPU actually starts doing stuff and actually consumes more current, then the voltage will droop and counteracting that is the point of LLC. You don't need to counteract it completely, in fact you probably don't want that at all, but it's still helpful in your situation. What LLC _won't_ do though is increase voltages when the CPU isn't heavily loaded.

Now, granted, what LLC is really for is when you need a pretty high voltage for heavy loads but you don't want to set your idle-but-clocked-up voltage to something dangerously high in order to get your load voltage after vdroop high enough, but I still think it's a pretty handy tool to use in your case. Raising the turbo voltage would also work though. The SVID behavior seems like a crude tool to me, though.

I've only tried manual so far to get a baseline for this CPU at 4.7GHz with no AVX offset. Setting 1.3v with LLC 4 leads to a reported vcore of 1.232v when running OCCT's small dataset test. HWinfo says the CPU package draw is just shy of 150W and a glance at the watt meter in the wall socket seems to indicate that's in the right ballpark. Seems quite stable so I think I'll take a look at 4.8GHz tomorrow.


----------



## vonPelz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renhanxue*
> 
> There's a difference between turbo and turbo. Your CPU can be clocked at 4.8GHz without actually _doing_ much and without consuming much power at all (try setting the power management in Windows to "high performance" and I think it'll stay clocked at max turbo all the time). Using the turbo voltage will raise that "idle but clocked up" voltage, but you don't really need that. When the CPU actually starts doing stuff and actually consumes more current, then the voltage will droop and counteracting that is the point of LLC. You don't need to counteract it completely, in fact you probably don't want that at all, but it's still helpful in your situation. What LLC _won't_ do though is increase voltages when the CPU isn't heavily loaded.
> 
> Now, granted, what LLC is really for is when you need a pretty high voltage for heavy loads but you don't want to set your idle-but-clocked-up voltage to something dangerously high in order to get your load voltage after vdroop high enough, but I still think it's a pretty handy tool to use in your case. Raising the turbo voltage would also work though. The SVID behavior seems like a crude tool to me, though.
> 
> I've only tried manual so far to get a baseline for this CPU at 4.7GHz with no AVX offset. Setting 1.3v with LLC 4 leads to a reported vcore of 1.232v when running OCCT's small dataset test. HWinfo says the CPU package draw is just shy of 150W and a glance at the watt meter in the wall socket seems to indicate that's in the right ballpark. Seems quite stable so I think I'll take a look at 4.8GHz tomorrow.


Good point on turbo voltage, didn't think of that! So, disregarding turbo voltage (keep under SVID) and trying to stabilize with LLC seems to be the better choice, though it's probably best to keep it 5 or lower(?).

SVID behaviour setting is indeed crude, and strange. If you leave it on auto (default) it resorts to worst-case, meaning a probably unnecessary high SVID. Pair that with LLC and you'll have some hefty volts at load...

Tomorrow I'll finally get to delidding, will get to pushing that 5GHz soon!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TurricanM3*
> 
> so is it 100% safe to disable Ring Down in terms of the "overvolting" warning in the uefi when using manual voltages for VCore/IO/SA. Thanks Praz!


what is "safe".. you are overclocking the part beyond the OEM spec. That said, I have my 8700K at 50 cache with ring bin down disabled. No issues and I have not detected any overvoltage of the cache via multimeter.
it really is a "smoke 'em if you got 'em" thing.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vonPelz*
> 
> I believe all three options will increase load voltage. But upping LLC and/or SVID behaviour will also affect non-turbo volts I think, and LLC will counter vdroop (for better or worse?).
> 
> So why use LLC instead of just upping the turbo voltage? Won't one have better control of the resulting load voltage with the latter option? I see everyone using LLC in their OCs, but I fail to see the immediate benefit...
> 
> As for adaptive being broken, changing SVID behaviour to best, IA AC & DC load to 0.0.1 and LLC to default worked for me (Z370-E). Otherwise the voltage was way higher than needed at load. But it sounds strange if the Maximus boards are providing less voltage than expected...


Vdroop is on the voltage rail for a reason: transient load line over and under-shoot which occurs on the uS time scale so is not detectable without proper equipment. It's not a new thing. IMO, it is always best to allow for a healthy amount of droop for daily use (and the least desirable thing to do is to use load line compensation to add voltage above the value set in bios). Low current loads running at a higher vcore are not the problem (remember, current kills, not voltage... within reason). So, choose a mid value for LLC and permit some droop. A normal OC (manual fixed, or adaptive with windows high perf mode enabled) will idle at a voltage higher than full load. 5.2/5.0 on this chip is 1.36V with 40mV droop at load


----------



## tripall

I have a memory compatibility issue with Asus PRIME Z370-A, the ram kit is ADATA XPG Z1 AX4U300038G16-DRZ.

Currently only can running at 2133 frequency.
I try to set to 3000(XMP), 2400, 2666, but it still can't boot correctly.

Can anyone help me? Thanks

Motherboard modelRIME Z370-A
UEFI Version:0605
CPU:8700K
Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB: ADATA XPG Z1 AX4U300038G16-DRZ 8G*2


----------



## gammagoat

New bios available for Max X wifi, Version 1003

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO-WI-FI-AC/HelpDesk_BIOS/


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> New bios available for Max X wifi, Version 1003
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO-WI-FI-AC/HelpDesk_BIOS/


Maximus X Formula and Maximus X Code has 1003 BIOS as well if you look under Please Select OS 'Others'.









Non Wi-Fi AC MAXIMUS X Hero as well.


----------



## KedarWolf

Were people having issues with not being able to use BIOS Flashback with the 0802 BIOS on The Wi-Fi Maximus X Hero?

I'm sure i had the WiFi BIOS and named it M10H.CAP on a MBR FAT32 USB.

It worked when I flashed it from within the BIOS.

Same USB worked with my Maximus X Formula with that BIOS named M10F.CAP

Am I missing something here?

Google is your friend.

"I'm not sure which hero board you have but if you have a the Maximus X Hero WiFi you need to call the bios file M10HWIFI.CAP for flashback to work (the user manual incorrectly states it should be M10H.CAP). I see you got around it already but maybe it will help in the future."


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Were people having issues with not being able to use BIOS Flashback with the 0802 BIOS on The Wi-Fi Maximus X Hero?
> 
> I'm sure i had the WiFi BIOS and named it M10H.CAP on a MBR FAT32 USB.
> 
> It worked when I flashed it from within the BIOS.
> 
> Same USB worked with my Maximus X Formula with that BIOS named M10F.CAP
> 
> Am I missing something here?
> 
> Google is your friend.
> 
> "I'm not sure which hero board you have but if you have a the Maximus X Hero WiFi you need to call the bios file M10HWIFI.CAP for flashback to work (the user manual incorrectly states it should be M10H.CAP). I see you got around it already but maybe it will help in the future."


yeah man - +1. that's a mistake in the manual.


----------



## renhanxue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> New bios available for Max X wifi, Version 1003
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO-WI-FI-AC/HelpDesk_BIOS/


I only see 0802. Tried shift-refresh as well as another browser, but nope. Did it get pulled?


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renhanxue*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> New bios available for Max X wifi, Version 1003
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO-WI-FI-AC/HelpDesk_BIOS/
> 
> 
> 
> I only see 0802. Tried shift-refresh as well as another browser, but nope. Did it get pulled?
Click to expand...

Just clicked the link. BIOS is there.

Make sure you're on the USA site and try under OS 'Others' as well.


----------



## renhanxue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Just clicked the link. BIOS is there.
> 
> Make sure you're on the USA site and try under OS 'Others' as well.


Nope, still nothing. I even went and checked the browser developer tools networking tab and it's simply not there in the response from the server. I'll chalk it up to some weird CDN caching issue for now and try again in a few hours.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renhanxue*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Just clicked the link. BIOS is there.
> 
> Make sure you're on the USA site and try under OS 'Others' as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, still nothing. I even went and opened the browser developer tools networking tab and it's simply not there in the response from the server. I'll chalk it up to some weird CDN caching issue for now and try again in a few hours.
Click to expand...

Too big for an attachment here, but.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_uM1jlnm7Oc68-iXnowPwVZHqUI-poho/view?usp=sharing


----------



## chibi

Finally some answers to the whole "Ring down bin" issue I brought up in October LOL. I'm going to safely assume a disable setting once I can power the puter up. I did know about setting the min/max to equal values, but did not want the cache to run full bore 24/7








_I can finally sleep well at night knowing it wasn't just me with weird cache clocks.







_


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renhanxue*
> 
> Nope, still nothing. I even went and checked the browser developer tools networking tab and it's simply not there in the response from the server. I'll chalk it up to some weird CDN caching issue for now and try again in a few hours.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Too big for an attachment here, but.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_uM1jlnm7Oc68-iXnowPwVZHqUI-poho/view?usp=sharing


Thanks - I clicked the link above

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO-WI-FI-AC/HelpDesk_BIOS/

and checked the Asus Max Hero Wifi support site from another browser as well - there is no new BIOS 1003 posted there. Weird. Anyway, thanks for posting a link to the file. Got it.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah man - +1. that's a mistake in the manual.


You guys are confusing me. The manual for the Max X Hero Wifi does say to name the BIOS file M10H.CAP. I downloaded 0802 a while back and updated my MOBO with it through the BIOS. It loaded off the USB fine. So you are saying that the Max X Hero WIFI BIOS file should be named M10HWIFI.CAP? If so, that is a pretty serious mistake in the manual. If true, then why did it flash OK when named M10H.CAP?


----------



## vonPelz

Delidding successful! Temps are now down around 15-20c during load. Next up, 5GHz...

Right now at: 4.8GHz, adaptive voltage (turbo volt under SVID), SVID behaviour best, LLC 3. x264 stable for four hours with a voltage of 1.248v.


----------



## DStealth

Still using the old BIOS on my MaximusX hero...
35+ k on water with this pure 6 core CPU







)
Very good









Also CB15 is not bad


----------



## renhanxue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> Too big for an attachment here, but.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_uM1jlnm7Oc68-iXnowPwVZHqUI-poho/view?usp=sharing


Thanks, appreciated! I went off to eat though and in the meantime it showed up on the Asus site (under "Drivers/Win10 64-bit", but not yet under "BIOS/Firmware", weirdly enough).


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah man - +1. that's a mistake in the manual.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You guys are confusing me. The manual for the Max X Hero Wifi does say to name the BIOS file M10H.CAP. I downloaded 0802 a while back and updated my MOBO with it through the BIOS. It loaded off the USB fine. So you are saying that the Max X Hero WIFI BIOS file should be named M10HWIFI.CAP? If so, that is a pretty serious mistake in the manual. If true, then why did it flash OK when named M10H.CAP?
Click to expand...

To use the BIOS Flashback port with a USB with the PC off, the best way to flash the BIOS, it needs to be renamed properly.

It'll still flash from within the BIOS if it's not, but that's not the preferred way to do it.


----------



## webwilli

New MXA-Bios also:

Version 1003 2018/01/02 9.48 MBytes

ROG MAXIMUS X APEX BIOS 1003
Improve system performance.
Improved DRAM compatibility
*Apex ONLY* If upgrading directly from BIOS ver. 0802 or lower, this will also update the ME code. Power loss during the ME Code update will cause the board to be unbootable.

http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1151/ROG_MAXIMUS_X_APEX/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-APEX-ASUS-1003.zip


----------



## Rowethren

Anyone installed the new BIOS and seen if they have fixed adaptive voltage behaviour?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rowethren*
> 
> Anyone installed the new BIOS and seen if they have fixed adaptive voltage behaviour?


Going to install soon, but I don't use adaptive, though I can try.


----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webwilli*
> 
> New MXA-Bios also:
> 
> Version 1003 2018/01/02 9.48 MBytes
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS X APEX BIOS 1003
> Improve system performance.
> Improved DRAM compatibility
> *Apex ONLY* If upgrading directly from BIOS ver. 0802 or lower, this will also update the ME code. Power loss during the ME Code update will cause the board to be unbootable.
> 
> http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1151/ROG_MAXIMUS_X_APEX/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-APEX-ASUS-1003.zip


Just updated, i was surprised because they just released an update like last week.


----------



## gammagoat

So far only positive I've seen is that CPU-Z now correctly reads vcore on my Hero X.


----------



## vonPelz

Hm, at 5GHz, the system is now throttling! HWInfo says it is because of IA: VR Thermal Alert and RING: VR Thermal Alert. The VRMs can't take it? CPU temps are fine, around 70c. Any way to mitigate with tweaking?

Current settings: 5GHz, adaptive w/ turbo voltage 1.32v, SVID behavior Typical and LLC at 4. IA AC and DC at 0.0.1.

Edit: Do I actually have to install the optional 40/50mm fan for the VRMs. That'd be ironic since I thought it seemed funny a fan holder was included...


----------



## renhanxue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rowethren*
> 
> Anyone installed the new BIOS and seen if they have fixed adaptive voltage behaviour?


What was the problem with it, exactly? I still haven't gotten around to actually overclocking by much because I'm waiting for my delid tool to arrive, but I'm running adaptive on 1003 right now on barely-above-stock settings. 4.7GHz, no AVX offset, adaptive 1.3v with offset -0.01v, LLC4, best-case SVID behavior. When running OCCT's small dataset test the VID is 1.334v with no offset and 1.324v with -0.01v offset, so that part works as expected. Seems to work fine?


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renhanxue*
> 
> Thanks, appreciated! I went off to eat though and in the meantime it showed up on the Asus site (under "Drivers/Win10 64-bit", but not yet under "BIOS/Firmware", weirdly enough).


I just checked the Max X Hero WIFI and it still shows 0802 under BIOS and Drivers - Win10 64-bit. I do see 1003 for some of the other boards but not the Hero Wifi. I am going to go ahead and update to the fiel Kedarwolf posted but I don't understand why I do not see it on the Asus site. Was there a list of changes?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> To use the BIOS Flashback port with a USB with the PC off, the best way to flash the BIOS, it needs to be renamed properly.
> 
> It'll still flash from within the BIOS if it's not, but that's not the preferred way to do it.


OK that makes sense. I am getting ready to flash the file you posted, which I have renamed "M10HWIFI.CAP ". I just checked the Asus site again for the Hero Wifi. I still see only version 0803. I do see 1003 for some of the other boards but not the Hero Wifi. Really strange. I am still working on pre-de-lid baseline so I guess if I am going to update the BIOS, I might as well do it before I go any further...


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> So far only positive I've seen is that CPU-Z now correctly reads vcore on my Hero X.


I have tried 2 different versions of CPU-Z on my Hero wifi (running BIOS 0803) and both of them show a Core Voltage value that is about half what AIDA, SIV, and HWiNFO give. Is that what you were seeing?


----------



## Rowethren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renhanxue*
> 
> What was the problem with it, exactly? I still haven't gotten around to actually overclocking by much because I'm waiting for my delid tool to arrive, but I'm running adaptive on 1003 right now on barely-above-stock settings. 4.7GHz, no AVX offset, adaptive 1.3v with offset -0.01v, LLC4, best-case SVID behavior. When running OCCT's small dataset test the VID is 1.334v with no offset and 1.324v with -0.01v offset, so that part works as expected. Seems to work fine?


I get high overshoot with adaptive which shouldn't be there. I am on llc5 and overshoot by around 0.04v


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> You guys are confusing me. The manual for the Max X Hero Wifi does say to name the BIOS file M10H.CAP. I downloaded 0802 a while back and updated my MOBO with it through the BIOS. It loaded off the USB fine. So you are saying that the Max X Hero WIFI BIOS file should be named M10HWIFI.CAP? If so, that is a pretty serious mistake in the manual. If true, then why did it flash OK when named M10H.CAP?


sorry for any confusion. When updating bios from within bios the name of the bios does not matter (using ezflash for example - which works just fine. best to load opt defaults before doing it this way). Only time the name matters is if you use bios flashback (machine off - you can even flash the bios with an empty cpu socket).








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Still using the old BIOS on my MaximusX hero...
> 35+ k on water with this pure 6 core CPU
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Very good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also CB15 is not bad


^^ this. unless a new bios fixes something broken, why change?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rowethren*
> 
> Anyone installed the new BIOS and seen if they have fixed adaptive voltage behaviour?


fixed what behavior?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vonPelz*
> 
> Hm, at 5GHz, the system is now throttling! HWInfo says it is because of IA: VR Thermal Alert and RING: VR Thermal Alert. The VRMs can't take it? CPU temps are fine, around 70c. Any way to mitigate with tweaking?
> 
> Current settings: 5GHz, adaptive w/ turbo voltage 1.32v, SVID behavior Typical and LLC at 4. IA AC and DC at 0.0.1.
> 
> Edit: Do I actually have to install the optional 40/50mm fan for the VRMs. That'd be ironic since I thought it seemed funny a fan holder was included...


yes.. and no. If you have poor air flow over the vrms, you should install a 50 or 60mm fan. If the case has great flow - should be okay unless you are running high current stress tests.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rowethren*
> 
> I get high overshoot with adaptive which shouldn't be there. I am on llc5 and overshoot by around 0.04v


set IA AC and IA DC load line to 0.01 in bios. CPU SVID to "Best case"


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes.. and no. If you have poor air flow over the vrms, you should install a 50 or 60mm fan. If the case has great flow - should be okay unless you are running high current stress tests.


Did this myself, airflow is fine, but why not, I stuck a 92mm Fractal fan there.
Finally found those mounting holes for the VRM fan holder, talk about tiny and in a strange spot...








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> set IA AC and IA DC load line to 0.01 in bios. CPU SVID to "Best case"


On the Apex I'm getting the same thing with LLC 5, 1.380v in BIOS will sometimes shoot to 1.392v, even with the AC and DC set to 0.01.


----------



## Rowethren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> set IA AC and IA DC load line to 0.01 in bios. CPU SVID to "Best case"


Did both, helped a bit but not a massive difference. To be honest it isn't the end of the world as I have my stable 5Ghz at 1.360 dialed in now but it would be good to have less overshoot. I also found that even when at maximum load the voltage randomly drops down 1 level which caused lower adaptive voltage settings which lowered the overshoot to be unstable.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Did this myself, airflow is fine, but why not, I stuck a 92mm Fractal fan there.
> Finally found those mounting holes for the VRM fan holder, talk about tiny and in a strange spot...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *On the Apex I'm getting the same thing with LLC 5, 1.380v in BIOS will sometimes shoot to 1.392v*, even with the AC and DC set to 0.01.


remember, cpuZ (or any OS based tool reading the 8 bit signal) is a 16mV increment. So if your cpuZ voltage is floating 13-16mV that's why - actual is probably between the two readings. (and why I calibrate things with a DMM on any MB, any brand).









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rowethren*
> 
> Did both, helped a bit but not a massive difference. To be honest it isn't the end of the world as I have my stable 5Ghz at 1.360 dialed in now but it would be good to have less overshoot. I also found that even when at maximum load the voltage randomly drops down 1 level which caused lower adaptive voltage settings which lowered the overshoot to be unstable.


how much "overshoot" (you really mean overvoltage, overshoot is a transient high/low voltage effect of current change on any voltage "clamped" line/circuit). Overvoltage is sustained under whatever conditions you see it under.
As above, if this is short term... ~ 13-16mV AND a cpuZ, AID64, SIV64, or any OS vcore reader, it is more likely not real.


----------



## vonPelz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes.. and no. If you have poor air flow over the vrms, you should install a 50 or 60mm fan. If the case has great flow - should be okay unless you are running high current stress tests.


I have a 40mm Noctua fan I'll try installing. Didn't think airflow would be a problem... I have a 240mm radiator front mounted, pushing air in. 140mm fans at side (in), back and top of case (out).

The throttling only happens during AVX loads it seems, such as x264 video encoding.

Does LLC affect VRM temps? I could try lowering that and setting a higher turbo voltage. Otherwise, there seems to be some VRM related tweaks still available in UEFI. Specifically the VRM Temperature protection, but I'd rather not mess with that.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> remember, cpuZ (or any OS based tool reading the 8 bit signal) is a 16mV increment. So if your cpuZ voltage is floating 13-16mV that's why - actual is probably between the two readings. (and why I calibrate things with a DMM on any MB, any brand).


HWinfo64. but yeah makes sense.
Generally it does sit on 1.360v or 1.376v depending on the load, with the spike of 1.392v on idle.

Ordered a multimeter yesterday, going to make use of the Apex's check points


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> HWinfo64. but yeah makes sense.
> Generally it does sit on 1.360v or 1.376v depending on the load, with the spike of 1.392v on idle.
> 
> *Ordered a multimeter yesterday, going to make use of the Apex's check points*


way to go!


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> way to go!


Hey I delidded my CPU for the first time, if I'm going to go in I may as well go all in


----------



## scracy

Just flashed 1003 UEFI on MXF so far adaptive voltage seems better but still no monitoring for VRM temperature. Also XMP VCCIO and VCCSA "auto" puts both these voltages way high 1.312V and 1.25V respectively.


----------



## Emmett

Hey all

What would be the best 2 sticks of ram I could get for my Maximus x apex. high speed 4000+ with decent timings.
I do not need or care about RGB mem.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Emmett*
> 
> Hey all
> 
> What would be the best 2 sticks of ram I could get for my Maximus x apex. high speed 4000+ with decent timings.
> I do not need or care about RGB mem.


This set:

https://m.newegg.com/products/N82E16820232671


----------



## Rowethren

My voltage behaviour is pretty much the same as yours schoolofmonkey. We must have matching CPUs!







I do have a DMM I might have a play with that and see what it is doing. At the end of the day it is still below 1.4 so I should be fairly safe long term anyway.


----------



## Emmett

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> This set:
> 
> https://m.newegg.com/products/N82E16820232671


Thank you!


----------



## renhanxue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Just flashed 1003 UEFI on MXF so far adaptive voltage seems better but still no monitoring for VRM temperature. Also XMP VCCIO and VCCSA "auto" puts both these voltages way high 1.312V and 1.25V respectively.


I got similarly high VCCIO and VCCSA voltages on the MXH (wifi variant) as well when enabling XMP, both on 0802 and 1003 so no difference there. I don't even have fast memory, just a 3200MHz kit. Turned them down to 1.15/1.1 respectively for now, but I suspect that's still higher than necessary. I do have VRM temp monitoring but only via the EC chip, not via BIOS, so I usually leave it off in HWInfo64, mostly for paranoia reasons. Not sure if monitoring it is actually harmful.

Did some further testing on my own board this morning and I'm pretty sure I lost the silicone lottery - the chip's one heck of a lot faster than my old i5-3570K but when it comes to overclocking it's not as good as I'd hoped. 4.8GHz with no AVX offset bluescreened after a few minutes at at 1.35v VID with LLC4 (vcore reading at 1.28v) and even the stock 4.7GHz turbo seems to require ~1.315v VID (1.25v-ish vcore reading) to be AVX stable. I think I'm still going to delid just for the fun of it because I've never done it before and quieter fans are always nice, but even then I don't think I'm going to get over 4.9GHz. Maybe with AVX offset 2 it's doable though but well, more and more apps are compiled with AVX enabled these days. At least I have a pretty good 70C 47x all-core AVX stable baseline now.


----------



## MikelMolto

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> On the Apex I'm getting the same thing with LLC 5, 1.380v in BIOS will sometimes shoot to 1.392v, even with the AC and DC set to 0.01.


If You have in Your Bios Ring down bin at disable, then the MB will give about this amount on VCore more for the higher Cache in Offset or Adaptive.


----------



## DStealth

Why are you afraid from overshoot / Over voltage / with such low voltages...On LN2 overshoot may be critical jumping over 2v...but a jump from 1.36 to 1.39 with heavy load is something very very light


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> This set:
> 
> https://m.newegg.com/products/N82E16820232671


They have been very cooperative!


----------



## DStealth

~100 bugs over the best CPU price(on this platform) for 2x8gb very interesting RAM prices








If you don't wanna 450$ kit almost the same results would be obtained with 250-270$ modules 3600c16/15 models for example. Or just get from B-die list ones at the best price could find...
Yes not all of them would do 4500 but for everyday usage 4100-4200 c16/17 will be doable with ease with just a slight variation of the voltage required


----------



## renhanxue

Even something relatively humble like 16 GB of DDR-3000 is about same price as a i5-8400, or slightly more expensive even. Exciting times.


----------



## Jpmboy

not when I bought them.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> They have been very cooperative!


Can you run them at the at that speed? or 4400, 4600?
I have clocked my 4226 kit to 4400, but have yet to get any stability at that speed but 4133 with tight timings seem very good

I put my Titan V on ebay at $2900.00, should of asked more, 1 hour it was sold and shipped


----------



## Rowethren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikelMolto*
> 
> If You have in Your Bios Ring down bin at disable, then the MB will give about this amount on VCore more for the higher Cache in Offset or Adaptive.


Can you clarify, so if I re-enable ring down bin it decreases voltage? Bit confused.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Why are you afraid from overshoot / Over voltage / with such low voltages...On LN2 overshoot may be critical jumping over 2v...but a jump from 1.36 to 1.39 with heavy load is something very very light


You are completely right to be honest but I am just being anal about having things Min/maxed as best I can, OCD is a gift and a curse


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Can you run them at the at that speed? or 4400, 4600?
> I have clocked my 4226 kit to 4400, but have yet to get any stability at that speed but 4133 with tight timings seem very good
> 
> I put my Titan V on ebay at $2900.00, should of asked more, 1 hour it was sold and shipped


4400c19? yes, but with the bclk and whopping VSA needed, 4266c17 is cleaner, and actually faster. Tho I did not spend a lot of time with 4400. I should.
Yeah, the fate of my TXV is still uncertain. I have 2 TXps, 2TXPs, a really good 1080 (2169 allday).. etc. The TXV sure is strong, but you know.... you can only have one.











this is where that kits seems to have a sweet spot on my board/cpu. VSa is up there but acceptable IMO.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 4400c19? yes, but with the bclk and whopping VSA needed, 4266c17 is cleaner, and actually faster. Tho I did not spend a lot of time with 4400. I should.
> Yeah, the fate of my TXV is still uncertain. I have 2 TXps, 2TXPs, a really good 1080 (2169 allday).. etc. The TXV sure is strong, but you know.... you can only have one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is where that kits seems to have a sweet spot on my board/cpu. VSa is up there but acceptable IMO.


Dude I got the same kit and it cant boot and run at 3866, 4133, 4266, 4300, 4400 with tight timings but it is only stable for benching. Nothing i try can pass a 1000% of hci memtest. I used your posted timings and voltages as guidlines and even added more voltage only to fail at 950% but sometimes fails sooner. Went as low as 3866cl16 and failed at 300%. Just cant get it stable.


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Dude I got the same kit and it cant boot and run at 3866, 4133, 4266, 4300, 4400 with tight timings but it is only stable for benching. Nothing i try can pass a 1000% of hci memtest. I used your posted timings and voltages as guidlines and even added more voltage only to fail at 950% but sometimes fails sooner. Went as low as 3866cl16 and failed at 300%. Just cant get it stable.


To clarify, did you have any CPU/Cache oc during that 950% run? Could be cache related if HCI or may be heat related? Have you tried sticking the fan bracket on and redoing the test with stock cpu clocks?


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> To clarify, did you have any CPU/Cache oc during that 950% run? Could be cache related if HCI or may be heat related? Have you tried sticking the fan bracket on and redoing the test with stock cpu clocks?


yeah tried that and yeah i got a fan.


----------



## chibi

This is a tough one then, may just be a weak imc sample on the CPU. May have to bump the timings up a notch as JP's config is pretty much running at the lowest allowed timings. I know, not what you're expecting to hear considering you've the best board, cpu and ram kit to push the z370 platform.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> This is a tough one then, may just be a weak imc sample on the CPU. May have to bump the timings up a notch as JP's config is pretty much running at the lowest allowed timings. I know, not what you're expecting to hear considering you've the best board, cpu and ram kit to push the z370 platform.


Yeah been at it for a while now.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 4400c19? yes, but with the bclk and whopping VSA needed, 4266c17 is cleaner, and actually faster. Tho I did not spend a lot of time with 4400. I should.
> Yeah, the fate of my TXV is still uncertain. I have 2 TXps, 2TXPs, a really good 1080 (2169 allday).. etc. The TXV sure is strong, but you know.... you can only have one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is where that kits seems to have a sweet spot on my board/cpu. VSa is up there but acceptable IMO.


I was running 4133, just upped it to 4266 without touching a thing, 52/50/4266


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I was running 4133, just upped it to 4266 without touching a thing, 52/50/4266


Interesting to see where your clocks compare. I did a windows re-installation and set cpu to 47/44 and focused on tightening down my memory at 4200Mhz and was able to pass GSAT at 1 hour. Called it a day and packed up the air coolers and then proceeded to build my water loop. Just waiting on a few more fittings before I can pump those numbers up!









In the img below, I did further tighten the tRDWR_dr & dd and some other timings which passed 1 Hr GSAT but I didn't bother updating the screenshot.

Edit - not sure I like my tras at 38. Might bump it up to 40 to follow the formula correctly.


----------



## Menthol

I am not good with memory timings at all, I used the Raja 1.4 profile and changed primaries and just a couple other settings, in better hands would probably improve


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Dude I got the same kit and it cant boot and run at 3866, 4133, 4266, 4300, 4400 with tight timings but it is only stable for benching. Nothing i try can pass a 1000% of hci memtest. I used your posted timings and voltages as guidlines and even added more voltage only to fail at 950% but sometimes fails sooner. Went as low as 3866cl16 and failed at 300%. Just cant get it stable.


need more info... post up a snip with the same windows: ATC and at least TurboVcore
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I was running 4133, just upped it to 4266 without touching a thing, 52/50/4266


Cool - I had trouble getting 17-17-17 stable, 17-18-18 has been good to go for this setup.








with lower VSA, I wold get sporadic 55s, 49, and 2Bs (all training related) on cold starts.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> need more info... post up a snip with the same windows: ATC and at least TurboVcore
> Cool - I had trouble getting 17-17-17 stable, 17-18-18 has been good to go for this setup.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> with lower VSA, I wold get sporadic 55s, 49, and 2Bs (all training related) on cold starts.



SA/IO @ 1.275/1.25 and dram @1.45


----------



## japau

Apex delivers!


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> 
> SA/IO @ 1.275/1.25 and dram @1.45


Your RTL/IOL''s have trained up badly.

RTL CHA/CHB D0 - 61,67 is too far apart. They should be no more than one apart from each other or the same

Eg - 61,62 OR 61,61

Same goes for the IOL's CHA/CHB D0 as well, no more than one apart or the same


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *japau*
> 
> Apex delivers!


What does the rest of your timings look like? Seems the board will have to autocorrect your tras as that's lower than 2/3rd of the formula









_The minimum clock cycles tRAS should be set to is the sum of CAS+tRCD+tRTP_


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> 
> SA/IO @ 1.275/1.25 and dram @1.45


17-18-18, and change tCWl to 16 - the RTLs may align better. If not, manually enter 60/61 and IOLs of 7 and 7 for ChA and B, d0

once you get these settled, you should be able to lower vsa to 1.26-ish and eventual dram V to 1.425..









this is the newest version of ram test.. running currently as I do this post.



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Your RTL/IOL''s have trained up badly.
> 
> RTL CHA/CHB D0 - 61,67 is too far apart. They should be no more than one apart from each other or the same
> 
> Eg - 61,62 OR 61,61
> 
> Same goes for the IOL's CHA/CHB D0 as well, no more than one apart or the same


^^this


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 17-18-18, and change tCWl to 16 - the RTLs may align better. If not, manually enter 60/61 and IOLs of 7 and 7 for ChA and B, d0
> 
> once you get these settled, you should be able to lower vsa to 1.26-ish and eventual dram V to 1.425..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is the newest version of ram test.. running currently as I do this post.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ^^this


Thanks dude gonna clear cmos and try this.


----------



## japau

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> What does the rest of your timings look like? Seems the board will have to autocorrect your tras as that's lower than 2/3rd of the formula
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The minimum clock cycles tRAS should be set to is the sum of CAS+tRCD+tRTP_


Here's the current one's.











Don't know about the tRAS rule (CAS+tRCD+tRTP). It might be true, but at least the benchmark scores / Ramtest speed shows lowering has effect.









I'm still working on RTL's & IOL's. I dont have a clue what to do with them. When i try to lower the offsets from 21 they go crazy. can't get them closer together. but it seems to work like this allso. Have to fiddle with them later.









If you got tips how to get them 60/60 i'm all ears.


----------



## chibi

Regarding the timings, I would refer to the guide by Raja. It's in the first post of the **Official* Intel DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread* under the *ROG DRAM Timing Control Guide* header. Scone put in a lot of work getting that OP filled with good info









Without fiddling with the RTL offset, what does it auto train to? Based on your SA/IO voltages + current RTL/IOL's, your CPU looks to have a strong IMC with the memory clocks you're pushing

Also, you're maxed out on your tREFI value, I'm not sure how to explain it properly, but having such a high value can lead to memory _decay_ with having such a long window of opportunity. Raising it does show performance benefits, but at what cost? Try suspending data to ram and see if you can consistent get back to Windows.


----------



## japau

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Regarding the timings, I would refer to the guide by Raja. It's in the first post of the **Official* Intel DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread* under the *ROG DRAM Timing Control Guide* header. Scone put in a lot of work getting that OP filled with good info
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Without fiddling with the RTL offset, what does it auto train to? Based on your SA/IO voltages + current RTL/IOL's, your CPU looks to have a strong IMC with the memory clocks you're pushing


Thanks, I will look into those. I havent touched the RTL/IOL they are all Auto. So thats what they auto train. 60/62 7/7

I have worked my way with secondaries + tWRRD_sg/dg to see if they keep aligned nicely. with 2T they go 62/63 6/7.



I tried to change the RTL's with Taichi before and it was total mess. Could not get a hand of it. I'll sure have some read thanks for the links.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Thanks dude gonna clear cmos and try this.


post back with how it goes.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *japau*
> 
> Here's the current one's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - I need to flash this up to 1003.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't know about the tRAS rule (CAS+tRCD+tRTP). It might be true, but at least the benchmark scores / Ramtest speed shows lowering has effect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm still working on RTL's & IOL's. I dont have a clue what to do with them. When i try to lower the offsets from 21 they go crazy. can't get them closer together. but it seems to work like this allso. Have to fiddle with them later.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you got tips how to get them 60/60 i'm all ears.


round trip latency will not likely be the same for both slots. First, find out what Auto gives for these values before setting manually. It varies quite a bit based on frequency, tCWL.. etc.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikelMolto*
> 
> If You have in Your Bios Ring down bin at disable, then the MB will give about this amount on VCore more for the higher Cache in Offset or Adaptive.


Nope it's not disabled..
@Jpmboy Explained it to me the other day, so all good









I really do need to get some better ram, I have not wiggle room at all for overclocking on this Hynix kit..


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> post back with how it goes


Will do. Ram Test has been running for an hour so far. Made all the changes you recommended and cleared cmos beforehand. I also manually set cpu/cache to 4.7/4.4 and left vcore at 1.365. Dunno how much i trust ram test tho. Guess we shall see. Wish me luck.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Will do. Ram Test has been running for an hour so far. Made all the changes you recommended and cleared cmos beforehand. I also manually set cpu/cache to 4.7/4.4 and left vcore at 1.365. Dunno how much i trust ram test tho. Guess we shall see. Wish me luck.


yeah - I tried a blend of Menthol's timings with the ones I posted above.. got 1 error at 4000%(~ 1 hour) with new ram test. Running GSAT for 2 hour right now to see if it's real (ram) or something else.

and jst as an FYI - GSAT popped an error with the same timings in less that 20 min. IMO - GSAT still is the best ram test.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - I tried a blend of Menthol's timings with the ones I posted above.. got 1 error at 4000%(~ 1 hour) with new ram test. Running GSAT for 2 hour right now to see if it's real (ram) or something else.


Nice lets see how it compares. How did your other test go that you posted a screenshot of? You were 2.5 hours in. Stable? Btw i am 2 hours and 15 minutes in with ram test now. So far so good. Gonna see if it runs another 2 hours and 45 mins.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Nice lets see how it compares. How did your other test go that you posted a screenshot of? You were 2.5 hours in. Stable? Btw i am 2 hours and 15 minutes in with ram test now. So far so good. Gonna see if it runs another 2 hours and 45 mins.


The snip at 2+ hours is using my 24/7 timings, which were thoroughly tested a while ago 17-18-18. THe failed runs are with 17-17-17. both trained at 1.45, run at 1.425V


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> and jst as an FYI - GSAT popped an error with the same timings in less that 20 min. IMO - GSAT still is the best ram test.


Nice! Wonder how long hci memtest woulda taken to find error. Had my doubts bout ram test. What commands do you use for GSAT?


----------



## KedarWolf

This is GSAT stable, my RAM at 4133MHZ.





Saved BIOS .txt file below.

4133MHZ_setting.txt 74k .txt file


BIOS screenshots in the spoiler.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Nice! Wonder how long hci memtest woulda taken to find error. Had my doubts bout ram test. What commands do you use for GSAT?


RamTest works fine... it may simply be that GSAT found this particular type of error faster. (tRCD/tRP at 17 vs 18).
for 16GB installed ram using BASH GSAT:
_stressapptest -W -M 13312 -s 7200 --pause_delay 14400_

(and changing back to 17-18-18 is well past where 17-17-17 failed GSAT)


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> RamTest works fine... it may simply be that GSAT found this particular type of error faster. (tRCD/tRP at 17 vs 18).
> for 16GB installed ram using BASH GSAT:
> _stressapptest -W -M 13312 -s 7200 --pause_delay 14400_
> 
> (and changing back to 17-18-18 is well past where 17-17-17 failed GSAT)


Are you running GSAT through Windows bash or a actual Linux install?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Are you running GSAT through Windows bash or a actual Linux install?


bash.


----------



## Menthol

Jpmboy,
You notice Ramtest kicks CPU clocks down to AVX offset, I'm hoping everyone is satisfied with this app, I can deal with the time it takes


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> RamTest works fine... it may simply be that GSAT found this particular type of error faster. (tRCD/tRP at 17 vs 18).
> for 16GB installed ram using BASH GSAT:
> _stressapptest -W -M 13312 -s 7200 --pause_delay 14400_
> 
> (and changing back to 17-18-18 is well past where 17-17-17 failed GSAT)


So I passed 2.5 hours of ram test and failed GSAT within 45 minutes. This was with the timings and settings that were suggested earlier. 
Guess Ill increase dram voltage and test again. Gonna stick with gsat and hci memtest for ram testing tho.


----------



## japau

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Regarding the timings, I would refer to the guide by Raja. It's in the first post of the **Official* Intel DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread* under the *ROG DRAM Timing Control Guide* header. Scone put in a lot of work getting that OP filled with good info
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Without fiddling with the RTL offset, what does it auto train to? Based on your SA/IO voltages + current RTL/IOL's, your CPU looks to have a strong IMC with the memory clocks you're pushing
> 
> Also, you're maxed out on your tREFI value, I'm not sure how to explain it properly, but having such a high value can lead to memory _decay_ with having such a long window of opportunity. Raising it does show performance benefits, but at what cost? Try suspending data to ram and see if you can consistent get back to Windows.


My 24/7 setting is about finished. I will lower tREFI to half or so for 24/7. Just wanted it for benchmarks anyway. Good to have so much knowledge available in community.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> round trip latency will not likely be the same for both slots. First, find out what Auto gives for these values before setting manually. It varies quite a bit based on frequency, tCWL.. etc.


I think i got a bit better hand of the RTLs / IOLs training. First i tested with offset all the way to 15 but neither did go lower than 60/62 so i think Apex auto training had allready managed quite good.

Did bring them to 60/61 after i realised how the IOL's work.











G Skill TridentZ RGB F4-4133C19-8GTZR @ 4200-17-18-18-28-1T

Memory OC is pretty darn addictive.









Have anyone put the 1003 BIOS and did it change anything? I'm still on 0901. Im hesitant to update as everything is working nicely.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Jpmboy,
> *You notice Ramtest kicks CPU clocks down to AVX offset*, I'm hoping everyone is satisfied with this app, I can deal with the time it takes


yes, so does GSAT and HCi. RAmtest is okay,
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> So I passed 2.5 hours of ram test and failed GSAT within 45 minutes. This was with the timings and settings that were suggested earlier.
> Guess Ill increase dram voltage and test again. Gonna stick with gsat and hci memtest for ram testing tho.


be sure to reboot after failing any ram test. It could be the ram... but I'm thinking you have something else going on there. Will the system pass GSAT with ram at defaults?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *japau*
> 
> My 24/7 setting is about finished. I will lower tREFI to half or so for 24/7. Just wanted it for benchmarks anyway. Good to have so much knowledge available in community.
> I think i got a bit better hand of the RTLs / IOLs training. First i tested with offset all the way to 15 but neither did go lower than 60/62 so i think Apex auto training had allready managed quite good.
> 
> Did bring them to 60/61 after i realised how the IOL's work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G Skill TridentZ RGB F4-4133C19-8GTZR @ 4200-17-18-18-28-1T
> Memory OC is pretty darn addictive.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Have anyone put the 1003 BIOS and did it change anything*? I'm still on 0901. Im hesitant to update as everything is working nicely.


it will update Intel ME with the "fix".


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes, so does GSAT and HCi. RAmtest is okay,
> be sure to reboot after failing any ram test. It could be the ram... but I'm thinking you have something else going on there. Will the system pass GSAT with ram at defaults?


yes it passes gsat at defaults and 11 hours of hci memtest at defaults. Good news, after failing gsat i rebooted back into bios and increased dram voltage from 1.45 to 1.46 and ran gsat for 2 hours and it passed. Currently have hci memtest running for about 6 hours at 1400% gonna let it run till 2000% hopefully. Will post screenshots when finished. Its looking good so far!


----------



## Menthol

I have never ran Gsat, or Memtest with an avx offset applied before


----------



## MikelMolto

Just installed Bios 1003 on my Hero and no problems.

With Windows10 Pro 1709 came an update KB4056892 and now AI Suite 3 don't start anymore. Some Server Problem.


----------



## MacT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikelMolto*
> 
> Just installed Bios 1003 on my Hero and no problems.
> 
> With Windows10 Pro 1709 came an update KB4056892 and now AI Suite 3 don't start anymore. Some Server Problem.


Windows10 Pro 1709 is sort of garbage, most of softwares and games won't work on this version of Windows 10. If you can rollback to previous Windows version.


----------



## l Nuke l

Thanks! @Jpmboy Here are screenshots of ram using your suggested settings. Failed GSAT at first but after increasing dram voltage from 1.45 to 1.46 I was able to pass 2 hours of GSAT and complete 2000% of HCI Memtest. Cpu and Cache were not overclocked. Going to set my cpu and cache overclock and test again to make sure everything stays stable. Hopefully i wont need to adjust DRAM or SA/IO voltages.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Thanks! @Jpmboy Here are screenshots of ram using your suggested settings. Failed GSAT at first but after increasing dram voltage from 1.45 to 1.46 I was able to pass 2 hours of GSAT and complete 2000% of HCI Memtest. Cpu and Cache were not overclocked. Going to set my cpu and cache overclock and test again to make sure everything stays stable. Hopefully i wont need to adjust DRAM or SA/IO voltages.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


and this is with a 4400c19 G.Skill ram kit?


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> and this is with a 4400c19 G.Skill ram kit?


Yessir.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Yessir.


1.46V is the training, eventual or both?


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 1.46V is the training, eventual or both?


eventual is on auto. Trains and runs on 1.46.
Do you think that is to high? With a digital multimeter it reads 1.462v, hwinfo64 says 1.456v.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> eventual is on auto. Trains and runs on 1.46.
> Do you think that is to high? With a digital multimeter it reads 1.462v, hwinfo64 says 1.456v.


1.46 is okay... but honestly, I'd try training at 1.46, and eventual at 1.425V. Pll Bandwidth 3


(this screenshot is after a memokay press... tried a low dram clock period that would not post)


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 1.46 is okay... but honestly, I'd try training at 1.46, and eventual at 1.425V. Pll Bandwidth 3


Okay. Ill give it a shot. Right now I am testing core/cache oc stability. Once those pass ill retest ram to make sure core/cache didnt affect the ram stability and ill try that out.


----------



## TurricanM3

How do you get 1T to post? No chance here.

Nice result isn't it?
http://abload.de/image.php?img=cachemem_4266cl17-18-wgoqs.png

But 17-18-18 is not RAM Test stable. Have to lower it to 17-19-19. My RAM (Corsair CMD16GX4M2B3600C18) runs best with 1.45v vDimm. Everything above runs worse. Any trick here? Thought the B dies scale up to 2v but mine doesn't.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TurricanM3*
> 
> How do you get 1T to post? No chance here.
> 
> Nice result isn't it?
> http://abload.de/image.php?img=cachemem_4266cl17-18-wgoqs.png
> 
> But 17-18-18 is not RAM Test stable. Have to lower it to 17-19-19. My RAM (Corsair CMD16GX4M2B3600C18) runs best with 1.45v vDimm. Everything above runs worse. Any trick here? Thought the B dies scale up to 2v but mine doesn't.


please fill out rig builder and add your rig to your sig block (show my stuff). that said,

are those are samsung B-die ram ICs?


----------



## aramil

New Bios:
TUF Z370 Gaming PLUS http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1151/TUF_Z370-PLUS_GAMING/TUF-Z370-PLUS-GAMING-ASUS-0606.zip?_ga=2.158530431.495159690.1514644850-763697409.1514644850


----------



## Miao

Hi there,
any release note about this new Bios v.0606?

on Z370 Prime-A Asus says:

Code:



Code:


PRIME Z370-A BIOS 0606
"1. Update CPU Microcode

2. Improve system compatibility and stability"

actually are more than usual informations from asus, but still not enough -.-


----------



## aramil

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Miao*
> 
> Hi there,
> any release note about this new Bios v.0606?
> 
> on Z370 Prime-A Asus says:
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> PRIME Z370-A BIOS 0606
> "1. Update CPU Microcode
> 
> 2. Improve system compatibility and stability"
> 
> actually are more than usual informations from asus, but still not enough -.-


Same as the Prime.... just trying it now....


----------



## SpeedyIV

So I know exactly NOTHING about Linux, let alone running it in a Bash shell under Windows, but I want to run Stressapptest from within a Bash shell so I don't have to boot into Linux. I think I figured out how to run Bash, get Linux installed, get into Terminal, get and install stressapptest and run it. For a test, I set it to run for 30 seconds with the command

_stressapptest -W -s 30_

and it seemed to work. This is what I got back. Does this look right?



Sorry for the newbie question but I have never messed with Linux, Bash, or stressapptest (until now). If I am on the right track, can someone explain what the rest of the parameters in this string are?

_stressapptest -W -M 13312 -s 7200 --pause_delay 14400_

I think the 7200 is seconds but I have no idea what -W, -M, 13312, and --pause_delay 14400 are doing. They don't seem to be Linux Terminal Commands so perhaps they are specific to stressapptest???

Also, when I run Bash on Ubuntu for Windows, I just get a terminal window. Am I supposed to see a Linux GUI?

Thanks!


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> So I know exactly NOTHING about Linux, let alone running it in a Bash shell under Windows, but I want to run Stressapptest from within a Bash shell so I don't have to boot into Linux. I think I figured out how to run Bash, get Linux installed, get into Terminal, get and install stressapptest and run it. For a test, I set it to run for 30 seconds with the command
> 
> _stressapptest -W -s 30_
> 
> and it seemed to work. This is what I got back. Does this look right?
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry for the newbie question but I have never messed with Linux, Bash, or stressapptest (until now). If I am on the right track, can someone explain what the rest of the parameters in this string are?
> 
> _stressapptest -W -M 13312 -s 7200 --pause_delay 14400_
> 
> I think the 7200 is seconds but I have no idea what -W, -M, 13312, and --pause_delay 14400 are doing. They don't seem to be Linux Terminal Commands so perhaps they are specific to stressapptest???
> 
> Also, when I run Bash on Ubuntu for Windows, I just get a terminal window. Am I supposed to see a Linux GUI?
> 
> Thanks!


Nope that's it. Youur doing it right. 13312 is amount of ram to be tested. 14400 gets rid of the spikes i believe not to sure in that one.


----------



## vonPelz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> with win10 and speedshift (os native) the c6 state report to the OS is needed for speedshift to function properly. That said, with adaptive vcore and dynamic frequency, there is no reason to leave all c-states enabled (c6 and speedshift exception). Can't get a much lower state than base clock idle withou core parking or core sleep. This can affect responsiveness.


I'm having some stability issues during idle and light load. Every few hours, my web browser stops responding and then the cursor and screen freezes, requiring a reset. Every time this has happened, Windows has logged a c-state transition just before the freeze. So I'm strongly suspecting C-states, as I have them all enabled at the moment. I'm going to disable them, but hoping to keep speedshift.

So to configure as your post, should one basically just disable all C-states except C6, and keep speedshift enabled?


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Nope that's it. Youur doing it right. 13312 is amount of ram to be tested. 14400 gets rid of the spikes i believe not to sure in that one.


Thanks! I am amazed I got it working to be honest. Somehow I ended up with "Ubuntu" and "Bash on Ubuntu for Windows' being installed. I can't get stressapptest to install in the Ubuntu window. It scrolls through pages of stuff and comes back and says it can't find the package or install it - something to that effect. Not sure what is going on with that. Bash on Ubuntu for Windows found it and installed it using the same command. Maybe they look in different libraries? It's all very mysterious to me, but it looks like I got it working so


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Thanks! I am amazed I got it working to be honest. Somehow I ended up with "Ubuntu" and "Bash on Ubuntu for Windows' being installed. I can't get stressapptest to install in the Ubuntu window. It scrolls through pages of stuff and comes back and says it can't find the package or install it - something to that effect. Not sure what is going on with that. Bash on Ubuntu for Windows found it and installed it using the same command. Maybe they look in different libraries? It's all very mysterious to me, but it looks like I got it working so


nice! Btw, if your using 32gb ram make sure to change that 13312 value to your available memory.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vonPelz*
> 
> I'm having some stability issues during idle and light load. Every few hours, my web browser stops responding and then the cursor and screen freezes, requiring a reset. Every time this has happened, Windows has logged a c-state transition just before the freeze. So I'm strongly suspecting C-states, as I have them all enabled at the moment. I'm going to disable them, but hoping to keep speedshift.
> 
> So to configure as your post, should one basically just disable all C-states except C6, and keep speedshift enabled?


I'd first check to see if the hang (which sounds like a cache issue?) occurs with speedshift and ALL c-states disabled. If yes, there is a different problem to solve. Leave Speedstep enabled.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> So I know exactly NOTHING about Linux, let alone running it in a Bash shell under Windows, but I want to run Stressapptest from within a Bash shell so I don't have to boot into Linux. I think I figured out how to run Bash, get Linux installed, get into Terminal, get and install stressapptest and run it. For a test, I set it to run for 30 seconds with the command
> 
> _stressapptest -W -s 30_
> 
> and it seemed to work. This is what I got back. Does this look right?
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry for the newbie question but I have never messed with Linux, Bash, or stressapptest (until now). If I am on the right track, can someone explain what the rest of the parameters in this string are?
> 
> _stressapptest -W -M 13312 -s 7200 --pause_delay 14400_
> 
> I think the 7200 is seconds but I have no idea what -W, -M, 13312, and --pause_delay 14400 are doing. They don't seem to be Linux Terminal Commands so perhaps they are specific to stressapptest???
> 
> Also, when I run Bash on Ubuntu for Windows, I just get a terminal window. Am I supposed to see a Linux GUI?
> 
> Thanks!


-W, more stressful algorithm than standard
-M, size in MegaBytes of RAM being tested, i.e. 8192 MB = 8 GB
-s, time of test in seconds, i.e. 3600 = 3600 seconds, 1 hour
-pause_delay xxxx where xxxx is > "-s" value skips a pause for cooldown purposes. The the "spike" is in cpu usage (server lingo)


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> -W, more stressful algorithm than standard
> -M, size in MegaBytes of RAM being tested, i.e. 8192 MB = 8 GB
> -s, time of test in seconds, i.e. 3600 = 3600 seconds, 1 hour
> -pause_delay xxxx where xxxx is > "-s" value skips a pause for cooldown purposes. The the "spike" is in cpu usage (server lingo)


Thank you - makes sense. Even though I apparently buggered up the Linux install (which is why I have 2 versions installed), 1 of them successfully installed stressapptest so it looks like I am good to go. I will run it today at stock speeds to confirm proper function. I may try to remove the Ubuntu version which will not install stressapptest, though I am not sure how to do that. I don't know why this version won't work. My goal is to test RAM stability - not learn Linux, though perhaps that would be a worthy investment of time. Thank you again for the explanation.

I was able to run at 5GHz / 4.8GHz @ 1.3 Adaptive -2 AVX and pass an hour of Prime v26.6 and v29.4 build 5 with AVX enabled, RB v25.4, AIDA, and XTU, no delid, 280 mm AIO Cooler, with temps in the 60s (c). I updated to BIOS 1003 so I need to set it up again and see if it behaves the same as 0802. I am still working on a baseline before delid but so far it seems to be doing well. I will post screen shots when I get it dialed in again.


----------



## DStealth

Anybody having a reduced scores in archiving SW after meltdown patch...heard it reduces the performance, can somebody bench just for confirmation Post installing it


----------



## l Nuke l

What patch?


----------



## DStealth

Finally manged to run XTU was new BIOS and Ai Suite 3 stopped...
Who said Cache doesn't matter







)


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> What patch?


https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4056892/windows-10-update-kb4056892


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Anybody having a reduced scores in archiving SW after meltdown patch...heard it reduces the performance, can somebody bench just for confirmation Post installing it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


http://www.overclock.net/t/1645071/computerbase-intel-serious-vulnerability-speculation-in-all-cpus/560_20

nbrock posted some benchmarks. Patch has had no effect on performance on my x299 rig.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4056892/windows-10-update-kb4056892


oh snap


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Is it normal for HWINFO64's IA: Max Turbo Limit to be flagged YES if you have a AVX offset.
I noticed today when I set 5.1Ghz with a AVX offset of -1 that it was marked yes, have no offset and its marked no.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Is it normal for HWINFO64's IA: Max Turbo Limit to be flagged YES if you have a AVX offset.
> I noticed today when I set 5.1Ghz with a AVX offset of -1 that it was marked yes, have no offset and its marked no.


yup same with me


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> yup same with me


Cool, when I first saw it I thought I did something wrong


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1645071/computerbase-intel-serious-vulnerability-speculation-in-all-cpus/560_20
> 
> nbrock posted some benchmarks. Patch has had no effect on performance on my x299 rig.


He's with 5775 cpu...wondered about Coffee performance hit.
Hilbert made a deep analysis pre-post patch but with 5960x ...I like the part with Timespy









Edit: Ah forgot to mention Ai suite cannot run after the patch some service errors are appearing


----------



## Menthol

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?98800-AI-Suite-3-Beta-Version-3-00-10-user-test-report-thread


----------



## DStealth

Thanks it works now.
Interesting uninstalled the patch and measured CB11.5 the better score was with the patch







)


----------



## bl4ckdot

A friend of mine reported a lower score on firestrike by about 1K on the physic score with bios 1003 and the Windows update for meltdown. Anyone with similar experience ?


----------



## japau

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl4ckdot*
> 
> A friend of mine reported a lower score on firestrike by about 1K on the physic score with bios 1003 and the Windows update for meltdown. Anyone with similar experience ?




Still at the 1700 mark with 5G after the january patch. More clocks i do not care to push with aircooler.


----------



## freestaler

Is that with the new Bios (Needed for Fix Spectre V2). 0901 looks not like that and at Asuspage isnt any bios update with MicroCode fix availble for your motherboard, rog max X Apex.

Maybe someone with a Prime Z370 and the new Bios from 4 january can do the benchs with befor and after.


----------



## japau

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freestaler*
> 
> Is that with the new Bios (Needed for Fix Spectre V2). 0901 looks not like that and at Asuspage isnt any bios update with MicroCode fix availble for your motherboard, rog max X Apex.
> 
> Maybe someone with a Prime Z370 and the new Bios from 4 january can do the benchs with befor and after.


0901 allready updated Management engine bug. Meltdown is patched with January update. ATM i dont know that there is patch for Spectre. It affects all processors, including AMD and phones.

I put a question to Asus forums regarding differences on 1003 BIOS and possible Spectre fix.

Got reply there,

Seems like 1003 BIOS will fix some things,

Speculation control settings for CVE-2017-5715 [branch target injection]

Hardware support for branch target injection mitigation is present: True
Windows OS support for branch target injection mitigation is present: True
Windows OS support for branch target injection mitigation is enabled: True

Speculation control settings for CVE-2017-5754 [rogue data cache load]

Hardware requires kernel VA shadowing: True
Windows OS support for kernel VA shadow is present: True
Windows OS support for kernel VA shadow is enabled: True
Windows OS support for PCID performance optimization is enabled: True [not required for security]

BTIHardwarePresent : True
BTIWindowsSupportPresent : True
BTIWindowsSupportEnabled : True
BTIDisabledBySystemPolicy : False
BTIDisabledByNoHardwareSupport : False
KVAShadowRequired : True
KVAShadowWindowsSupportPresent : True
KVAShadowWindowsSupportEnabled : True
KVAShadowPcidEnabled : True

Anyone with 1003 BIOS on z370 can confirm this?


----------



## freestaler

Thats not engough, there is a microcode update, hopefuilly not with a impact on perfomance.Spectre V1 affects all vendors. Spectre V2 is a other "Bug" CVE-2017-5715 not -5754 or 5753.

Look at this:

Version 0606
2018/01/048.56 MBytes
PRIME Z370-A BIOS 0606
*"1. Update CPU Microcode*

2. Improve system compatibility and stability"

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/PRIME-Z370-A/HelpDesk_BIOS/

MS has release the microcode update first for the Surface. It shut fix Spectre Version 2. Version 1 couldnt fix with Bios or Microcodeupdate..

or

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/05/spectre_flaws_explained/

On pre-Skylake CPUs, kernel countermeasures - a*nd on Skylake and later, a combination of a microcode updates and kernel countermeasures known as Indirect Branch Restricted Speculation, aka IBRS - to kill Spectre Variant 2 attacks that steal data from kernels and hypervisors.*

Update: There was a number fault from me about the cve.


----------



## TurricanM3

My 24/7 setup


----------



## japau

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TurricanM3*
> 
> My 24/7 setup


Nice setup!











I allso updated to the 1003 BIOS and did all the security patches. It made a tiny performance hit. Old testspeed was 150.8MB/s , new is 149.8MB/s. Performance dropped 0.67%.


----------



## freestaler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *japau*
> 
> Nice setup!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I allso updated to the 1003 BIOS and did all the security patches. It made a tiny performance hit. Old testspeed was 150.8MB/s , new is 149.8MB/s. Performance dropped 0.67%.


It looks like the 1003 isnt with the microupdate for Spectre Variant (CVE-2017-5715) . Nothing in the change log and to old. So there should come one with the micro update.. then you should test again.


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freestaler*
> 
> It looks like the 1003 isnt with the microupdate for Spectre Variant (CVE-2017-5715) . Nothing in the change log and to old. So there should come one with the micro update.. then you should test again.


It also depends on what kind of workload you are benchmarking. It has no impact on some and large impact on others.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> It also depends on what kind of workload you are benchmarking. It has no impact on some and large impact on others.


not many folks in this z370 thread managing a "secure" data center... but there are a few around here.


----------



## ChaosAD

Today i had some time to test the new bios. No improvement on vcore or ram overclocking. Still cant boot at 4133 or above and still cant run 4000 with 1T. Other than that, when i use fixed vcore, if i set 50 for uncore, it runs at 5000 like it should. If i use adaptive, no matter if i set max uncore at 49,50 or 51 and min auto or 8, it runs at max 48. Anyone else experience the same issue?


----------



## fleps

Hey guys

I finally delideed my 8700K and can now do 5Ghz -2AVX @ 1.365 vcore (BIOS).

I noted that my VCCIO and VCSA (that are on Auto) are REALLY high at 1.3+. Should I lower them?

I'm using a bad TridentZ 3200 CL16 kit so I wont even bother trying to OC this (I don't see it going over 3600 with some CL18 or 19, which is bad right?)

Thanks!


----------



## reset1101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Hey guys
> 
> I finally delideed my 8700K and can now do 5Ghz -2AVX @ 1.365 vcore (BIOS).
> 
> I noted that my VCCIO and VCSA (that are on Auto) are REALLY high at 1.3+. Should I lower them?
> 
> I'm using a bad TridentZ 3200 CL16 kit so I wont even bother trying to OC this (I don't see it going over 3600 with some CL18 or 19, which is bad right?)
> 
> Thanks!


I have both values at 1.025v for 3500Mhz so you should be fine for 3200Mhz.


----------



## MikelMolto

After a lot of testing Ram with Memtest and CPU with Prime p95v294b4 and LinX LinX v0.8.0 I report everything is 100% stable.
CPU 8700K is running 4,8Ghz on my Hero because we here in Brazil have summer and my 115i is on his limit.
My Memory Corsair Dominator Platinum Kit 16GB, DDR4-3200, CL16-18-18-36 is running with the same timings and Volt at 3600Mhz in Mode 1.









VCCIO: 0,9750V and VCSA: 1,0750V is fully enough to pass all testes.

Yes, I have the Windows 10 Patch running and the latest Bios 1003 installed.


----------



## DStealth

Limits...these CPUs has none...just tested SuperPI and very low 24/7 voltages....madness
[email protected] HT on


----------



## japau

My Apex seems to have some coils singing with high memory frequency & 1T under load. Its a lot less noticeable with 2T or couple hundred Mhz less with 1T.

Any tricks one can try?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Limits...these CPUs has none...just tested SuperPI and very low 24/7 voltages....madness
> [email protected] HT on


These _are_ fun chips!


----------



## vonPelz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I'd first check to see if the hang (which sounds like a cache issue?) occurs with speedshift and ALL c-states disabled. If yes, there is a different problem to solve. Leave Speedstep enabled.


Thanks. It seems C-states were the culprit. After disabling them the system was completely stable. I've now also enabled C6 and SpeedShift, still stable. I believe I will keep this configuration.

Still have to install fan for the VRMs... Hopefully the system can achieve 5GHz AVX without throttling then.







Feels bad settling for 4.8/4.9, especially when it's only the VRMs hindering.
Also, how does the board decide to throttle based on the VRMs? There doesn't seem to be a readable probe for VRM temp. I hope it's not only based on watt load.


----------



## KedarWolf

http://www.overclock.net/t/1510328/asus-x99-motherboard-series-official-support-thread-north-american-users-only/16020_20#post_26537055

http://www.overclock.net/t/1510328/asus-x99-motherboard-series-official-support-thread-north-american-users-only/16020_20#post_26537072

See these two posts if you want to check if the exploits are patched and the second to manually download the Windows updates to patch them.

Be sure to Rep +1 them.


----------



## iamdjango

I've recently bought a Prime Z370-A for a new rig. I had DPC latency issues with AIDA64 accessing the motherboard's EC but uninstalling it only reduced latency and didn't solved my problem entirely. I still have high latency across multiple drivers and moving the mouse in any game causes GPU usage to stutter and drop to zero. I've tried disabling all devices I could in the bios (improved latency a little with every device I turned off but didn't fix), reverting to different device driver versions (GPU, NIC, Realtek etc.), turned on/off power management features (C-States etc.), moved devices to MSI interrupts, disabled fast boot/hibernate and even pulled out my graphics card to use Intel instead. No joy. I'm still bouncing around the 300-1500us mark, averaging 500us (my old Maximus VI HERO always sits at <100us):



I've also done xperf traces with debug symbols to see if I had some dodgy kernel level driver(s). All that showed was random different interrupts having latency issues and nothing specific:



I only got the board a few weeks back and have tried bios 0605 and 0606. Is anyone else having issues with broken interrupts on ASUS motherboards?


----------



## renhanxue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamdjango*
> 
> I've recently bought a Prime Z370-A for a new rig. I had DPC latency issues with AIDA64 accessing the motherboard's EC but uninstalling it only reduced latency and didn't solved my problem entirely. I still have high latency across multiple drivers and moving the mouse in any game causes GPU usage to stutter and drop to zero. I've tried disabling all devices I could in the bios (improved latency a little with every device I turned off but didn't fix), reverting to different device driver versions (GPU, NIC, Realtek etc.), turned on/off power management features (C-States etc.), moved devices to MSI interrupts, disabled fast boot/hibernate and even pulled out my graphics card to use Intel instead. No joy. I'm still bouncing around the 300-1500us mark, averaging 500us (my old Maximus VI HERO always sits at <100us):
> 
> 
> 
> I've also done xperf traces with debug symbols to see if I had some dodgy kernel level driver(s). All that showed was random different interrupts having latency issues and nothing specific:
> 
> 
> 
> I only got the board a few weeks back and have tried bios 0605 and 0606. Is anyone else having issues with broken interrupts on ASUS motherboards?


Nope. Tested Latencymon on a Maximus X Hero Wifi with BIOS 1003 and pretty much all devices turned on (Bluetooth turned off in Windows but I can't recall turning anything off in BIOS) and a web browser plus some other stuff (mail client, Skype, Discord, Windows defender, Logitech's mouse drivers, etc) running, on Windows 10 Pro N: usually the top meter stays well under 100 us. Max interrupt-to-process 262 us, max ISR routine excution time 135 us. "Appears suitable to real-time audio", it says.

edit: regarding drivers: I'm using Microsoft's Wifi driver rather than Realtek's (had some ping issues that I'm not sure are driver related, trying it experimentally). I have the Realtek audio control panel disabled from starting with Windows because I'm using a USB mic and a USB headphone amp, but the Realtek audio driver is installed. Using Samsung's NVMe driver instead of Microsoft's. Think that's all.

edit the second: just throwing a random idea out there since your second screenshot shows the network driver: do you have interrupt moderation on in the Intel NIC driver?


----------



## iamdjango

Thanks, I've tried with both Microsoft and Samsung drivers, didn't help. Was on the default adaptive, turn it off and no change:


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamdjango*
> 
> Thanks, I've tried with both Microsoft and Samsung drivers, didn't help. Was on the default adaptive, turn it off and no change:


A hard fault happens when the address in memory for part of a program is no longer in main memory, but has been instead swapped out to the paging file... you may want to verify the paging file is the issue by turning it off. Then check tthat the ram is fully stable and not swapping out corrupted info. An unstable OC can cause hard page faults also.









________________________
try as I could, I could not get any significant DPC, I even ran PCMArk10 while recording the screen at 4K and running LatMon. IDK, I'm guessing it's a configuration or driver issue.


----------



## the_real_7

Upgraded My ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC) with Version 1003

The Good
1. CPU-Z_x64 and HWMonitor_x64 read correct vcore now
2.Boots slightly faster
3. Unigine Heaven & Valley Benchmarks exactly as before.

The Bad
1. My Trident Z B-DIE F4-3600C16D-16GTZ wont do 1t stock clocks wont even boot , and wont do CL15-15-15-35 anymore or DDR4-4000 @ CL19-21-21-41 , Which all settings would pass on Version 802

2. On Crystal Disk Mark 5 and a Samsung Pro 960 Pro took a hit in 4k32ti bench about 20 percent

Went back to ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC) with Version 802 bios all smooth as butter again waiting for next bios


----------



## iamdjango

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> A hard fault happens when the address in memory for part of a program is no longer in main memory, but has been instead swapped out to the paging file... you may want to verify the paging file is the issue by turning it off. Then check tthat the ram is fully stable and not swapping out corrupted info. An unstable OC can cause hard page faults also.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________
> try as I could, I could not get any significant DPC, I even ran PCMArk10 while recording the screen at 4K and running LatMon. IDK, I'm guessing it's a configuration or driver issue.


Many thanks for the idea to check my OC, even though it's benchmarking stable. Clearing the cmos has stopped latency bouncing around at idle. Reverting to nvidia driver version 385.69 also helped.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> A hard fault happens when the address in memory for part of a program is no longer in main memory, but has been instead swapped out to the paging file... you may want to verify the paging file is the issue by turning it off. Then check tthat the ram is fully stable and not swapping out corrupted info. An unstable OC can cause hard page faults also.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________
> try as I could, I could not get any significant DPC, I even ran PCMArk10 while recording the screen at 4K and running LatMon. IDK, I'm guessing it's a configuration or driver issue.


Is a pagefile even needed? Can one just run pc without it?


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> A hard fault happens when the address in memory for part of a program is no longer in main memory, but has been instead swapped out to the paging file... you may want to verify the paging file is the issue by turning it off. Then check tthat the ram is fully stable and not swapping out corrupted info. An unstable OC can cause hard page faults also.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________
> try as I could, I could not get any significant DPC, I even ran PCMArk10 while recording the screen at 4K and running LatMon. IDK, I'm guessing it's a configuration or driver issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is a pagefile even needed? Can one just run pc without it?
Click to expand...

If your O/S is on an SSD no page file needed and to reduce writes to your SSD no page file is the way to go.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> If your O/S is on an SSD no page file needed and to reduce writes to your SSD no page file is the way to go.


Cool gonna try it out.


----------



## renhanxue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *the_real_7*
> 
> Upgraded My ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC) with Version 1003
> 
> The Good
> 1. CPU-Z_x64 and HWMonitor_x64 read correct vcore now
> 2.Boots slightly faster
> 3. Unigine Heaven & Valley Benchmarks exactly as before.
> 
> The Bad
> 1. My Trident Z B-DIE F4-3600C16D-16GTZ wont do 1t stock clocks wont even boot , and wont do CL15-15-15-35 anymore or DDR4-4000 @ CL19-21-21-41 , Which all settings would pass on Version 802
> 
> 2. On Crystal Disk Mark 5 and a Samsung Pro 960 Pro took a hit in 4k32ti bench about 20 percent
> 
> Went back to ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC) with Version 802 bios all smooth as butter again waiting for next bios


BIOS 1003 has the Intel microcode patch for Meltdown/Spectre mitigation AFAIK so the hit in performance on NVMe SSD's is expected and in line with what's been reported elsewhere. I'm actually unsure if reverting the BIOS also reverts the microcode patch too though - did you benchmark the SSD again after rolling back?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> If your O/S is on an SSD no page file needed and to reduce writes to your SSD no page file is the way to go.


What does your OS being on an SSD have to do with the page file...? It extends the virtual memory size. If you have, say, 32GB RAM or more, Windows is unlikely to actually use your pagefile much if at all because it will rarely need to page things out, but there's no meaningful benefit from turning it off, and doing so can subtly break some obscure edge cases. Just leave it default settings.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Is a pagefile even needed? Can one just run pc without it?


sure you can, but as already stated, unless your use-scenario can reserve (private bytes) 50% of installed ram or more, the pageing file will get little use. Downside is bug checks on a bsod can fail to write a dmp file. I think the main benefit for a gaming rig depends on the amount of vram on the card, less so with system ram since most rigs have at least 16GB. 32GB and higher sys ram, no, a page file is not really necessary (with the exception noted). Also, Windows fast boot may not be so fast - not sure.

For folks who worry about SSD "wear" and a paging file, the simpliest thing to do is install a small SSD matching the install ram amount and move the swap space (page file) to that cheapo drive.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamdjango*
> 
> Many thanks for the idea to check my OC, even though it's benchmarking stable. Clearing the cmos has stopped latency bouncing around at idle. Reverting to nvidia driver version 385.69 also helped.


yeah this is where most "benchmarkers" get dinged. Bench stable - like it can complete a benchmark - may only be so because of correctable errors (WHEA, MCEs) lowering performance efficiency. So, _barely_ bench stable may not yield the best benchmark results. failed checksums after a proc call result in looping the proc call until the checksums match "whea" or "mce" (machine check error)... or it becomes and uncorrectable WHEA and the rig crashes


----------



## iZeroFive

Hi folks,

I'm upgrading my 4690K to i7-8700, week ago i bought Strix Z370-F from amazon.de for a 160€ (prime deal) and i also bought Vengeance RGB kit (CMR16GX4M2C3000C15) from my local store for a relatively good price.I have couple of questions if you don't mind.

-After 2500K and 4690K this is my first i7 and it's my first non-K CPU, I know i7-8700K users changing a couple of settings in bios is there something i should do in order to maintain all core 4.3ghz for my i7-8700? (I have Kraken X52 for cooling.)

-For coffee lake in general, other than XMP settings is there something in bios i should look into?

-Will my Vengeance RGB kit work with Asus Aura? It's listed as supported and Aura software got couple of updates for Corsair rams i hope it works properly.I also bought Phanteks Combo Set i'm planning to link them all.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> If your O/S is on an SSD no page file needed and to reduce writes to your SSD no page file is the way to go.


Disabling Page File can make a few programs to not work properly or not work at all (not that they "use" the pagefile, but they require it enabled).

Also it's a misconception that having a Page File enabled on SSD will reduce it's life. According to real case knowledge it's age that will affect SSD reliability, not usage.

More info: https://www.tenforums.com/general-support/42782-should-i-disable-paging-file-my-ssd.html


----------



## the_real_7

Quote:


> BIOS 1003 has the Intel microcode patch for Meltdown/Spectre mitigation AFAIK so the hit in performance on NVMe SSD's is expected and in line with what's been reported elsewhere. I'm actually unsure if reverting the BIOS also reverts the microcode patch too though - did you benchmark the SSD again after rolling back?


Yes the microcode patch must of hit my performance on My 960 Pro. You can reverse the bios. the microcode does not get stored and is only loaded at the bios boot and not inside the processor. Pics before and after bios Updates from 1003 and back to 802

After bios update to 1003


After bios restored to 802


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Disabling Page File can make a few programs to not work properly or not work at all (not that they "use" the pagefile, but they require it enabled).
> 
> Also it's a misconception that having a Page File enabled on SSD will reduce it's life. According to real case knowledge it's age that will affect SSD reliability, not usage.
> 
> More info: https://www.tenforums.com/general-support/42782-should-i-disable-paging-file-my-ssd.html


not sure that thread supports either conclusion. On the rigs here... those with 32GB or more ram AND that are not running software that will hold that much working memory in ram have Pf disabled... never came across a program that failed to run or any other issues. My z370 apex has 16GB of ram, and I've had the pf disabled since launch - again, not one ram overflow issue. 6950X with 64GB of ram has the Pf on since it will run software that (stupidly) will collect a huge working-ram set.

But, yes - no one here is gonna wear out a a modern SSD during the lifetime of rig's relevancy. There's an intel dx48bt2/Q9650 here with an SSD os install that has been on and running for more than 5 years 24/7/365. SSD is fine (and it captures security cam video, compresses and archives 60 days worth all-day-every-day).


----------



## DStealth




----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*


----------



## DStealth

Reverted the old BIOS 0802
Tested single core performance these CPU's are good








Just HT off


----------



## Jpmboy

Don;t mess with my potato chips!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Reverted the old BIOS 0802
> Tested single core performance these CPU's are good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just HT off
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


you got a real good chip there!


----------



## DStealth

Thanks,
Not wanna push it too hard..1,435v BIOS + LLC6


----------



## Jpmboy

Yeah - you'd want to keep it "a real good chip".
(I've gotta work on beating my 7700K score







)



you must be running win10 in that post.


----------



## l Nuke l

For those running the apex whats the recommended bios right now? From what i have been reading seems like most are saying that anything after 0802 is no good?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> For those running the apex whats the recommended bios right now? From what i have been reading seems like most are saying that anything after 0802 is no good?


I'm using 1003 and it is working fine. What's the "no good"?


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Yeah - you'd want to keep it "a real good chip".
> (I've gotta work on beating my 7700K score
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> you must be running win10 in that post.


Yes Windows 10 no optimizations at all...have 5min4xx run on AIO with it....now should enter 30s while 200+Mhz higher








Probably could not match your score with 4 dimms c16 or 15 ...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Yes Windows 10 no optimizations at all...have 5min4xx run on AIO with it....now should enter 30s while 200+Mhz higher
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Probably could not match your score with 4 dimms c16 or 15 ...


the 8700K should be able to do better than 7700K... just gotta get the ram to cooperate.


----------



## aliquiswe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> All slots enabled I'm back at 4200MHZ stable.


I can't even run two at 3466 mhz using xmp on z370-f.

Got lots of memory errors. Should I do something about that or just expect that.

(z370-f, i7 8700K no OC, corsair vengeance rgb 3466 mhz cl 16 2x8 gb kit.)


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the 8700K should be able to do better than 7700K... just gotta get the ram to cooperate.


Unfortunately it's not the memory...as could run up to 4200 14-14-14-28-280 1T on x299 sub 1.5v...Just Maximus Hero or my IMC is getting troubles with frequencies over 3800-3900 with 1T even with 2 dimms.... Could run 4Ghz 1T but higher timings as performance is reduced past some point not even mention stability...


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Unfortunately it's not the memory...as could run up to 4200 14-14-14-28-280 1T on x299 sub 1.5v...


In what universe?


----------



## DStealth

Not talking about stability, just benching of course.
Edit found a pic was 15-15-15-28-280 sorry not 14s


But anyhow not memory limited here for sure...Chipset/Board/IMC


----------



## chibi

Watercooling loop almost done, can get back to tuning Soon™


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aliquiswe*
> 
> I can't even run two at 3466 mhz using xmp on z370-f.
> 
> Got lots of memory errors. Should I do something about that or just expect that.
> 
> (z370-f, i7 8700K no OC, corsair vengeance rgb 3466 mhz cl 16 2x8 gb kit.)


I have a set of 3466 Red LED not RGB, XMP never worked on Z270 board, 3200mhz was difficult to get stable (they run great at 2133 default), last Corsair kit I have purchased

A Gskill b-die kit will cure your ill's and make life enjoyable again


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Watercooling loop almost done, can get back to tuning Soon™
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


THAT is looking real good!


----------



## chibi

^Thx brotha


----------



## Sanmayce

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Thanks,
> Not wanna push it too hard..1,435v BIOS + LLC6


Two suggestions I need:
- best value (not best speeds) for 4x16GB DDR4;
- best value Z370 mobo.

This year wanna buy Z370 motherboard paired with i3-8100 and 4x16GB, however seeing your @DStealth RAM specs, second thoughts arose.
Since my use case is heavy RAM loads (compression) my intent is to fill the 4 slots to the max while looking for cheap choice (at the moment Kingston 2666MHz), so in order to save money from the expensive mobo $260 (Maximus X Hero) and RAM $1283 (on the shot below) my current pick is mobo $115 (Gigabyte) and RAM $760 (Kingston Fury). My request, could you run 7-zip benchmark (C:\>7za b), wanna compare with my humble scores.

Code:



Code:


D:\smashshop_2018-Jan-06>7za_v16.04_x64.exe b

7-Zip (a) [64] 16.04 : Copyright (c) 1999-2016 Igor Pavlov : 2016-10-04

Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-7200U CPU @ 2.50GHz (806E9)
CPU Freq:  2064  2064  4000  4000  2723  3282  2976  3121  3121

RAM size:    8092 MB,  # CPU hardware threads:   4
RAM usage:    882 MB,  # Benchmark threads:      4

                       Compressing  |                  Decompressing
Dict     Speed Usage    R/U Rating  |      Speed Usage    R/U Rating
         KiB/s     %   MIPS   MIPS  |      KiB/s     %   MIPS   MIPS

22:       9422   310   2960   9166  |     106199   398   2275   9061
23:       9188   313   2991   9362  |     104759   398   2278   9064
24:       8997   318   3038   9674  |     103001   399   2266   9042
25:       8682   321   3084   9913  |     101883   398   2279   9067
----------------------------------  | ------------------------------
Avr:             316   3018   9529  |              398   2274   9059
Tot:             357   2646   9294

https://www.amazon.com/G-SKILL-TridentZ-PC4-26600-Platform-F4-3333C16Q-64GTZ/dp/B01DMZWPQ6/ref=sr_1_8?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1515692403&sr=1-8&keywords=g.skill+4000mhz


VERSUS

https://www.amazon.com/Kingston-Technology-HyperX-HX426C16FB-16/dp/B06XKSPXHV/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&qid=1515693507&sr=8-16&keywords=kingston+fury+16GB


----------



## KedarWolf

I tell my friend, "Check out my new Z370 Maximus X Formula, the VRMs are water cooled!!"

Him, "Were they overheating before?"

Me,


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sanmayce*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Thanks,
> Not wanna push it too hard..1,435v BIOS + LLC6
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two suggestions I need:
> - best value (not best speeds) for 4x16GB DDR4;
> - best value Z370 mobo.
> 
> This year wanna buy Z370 motherboard paired with i3-8100 and 4x16GB, however seeing your @DStealth RAM specs, second thoughts arose.
> Since my use case is heavy RAM loads (compression) my intent is to fill the 4 slots to the max while looking for cheap choice (at the moment Kingston 2666MHz), so in order to save money from the expensive mobo $260 (Maximus X Hero) and RAM $1283 (on the shot below) my current pick is mobo $115 (Gigabyte) and RAM $760 (Kingston Fury). My request, could you run 7-zip benchmark (C:\>7za b), wanna compare with my humble scores.
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> D:\smashshop_2018-Jan-06>7za_v16.04_x64.exe b
> 
> 7-Zip (a) [64] 16.04 : Copyright (c) 1999-2016 Igor Pavlov : 2016-10-04
> 
> Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-7200U CPU @ 2.50GHz (806E9)
> CPU Freq:  2064  2064  4000  4000  2723  3282  2976  3121  3121
> 
> RAM size:    8092 MB,  # CPU hardware threads:   4
> RAM usage:    882 MB,  # Benchmark threads:      4
> 
> Compressing  |                  Decompressing
> Dict     Speed Usage    R/U Rating  |      Speed Usage    R/U Rating
> KiB/s     %   MIPS   MIPS  |      KiB/s     %   MIPS   MIPS
> 
> 22:       9422   310   2960   9166  |     106199   398   2275   9061
> 23:       9188   313   2991   9362  |     104759   398   2278   9064
> 24:       8997   318   3038   9674  |     103001   399   2266   9042
> 25:       8682   321   3084   9913  |     101883   398   2279   9067
> ----------------------------------  | ------------------------------
> Avr:             316   3018   9529  |              398   2274   9059
> Tot:             357   2646   9294
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/G-SKILL-TridentZ-PC4-26600-Platform-F4-3333C16Q-64GTZ/dp/B01DMZWPQ6/ref=sr_1_8?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1515692403&sr=1-8&keywords=g.skill+4000mhz
> 
> 
> VERSUS
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Kingston-Technology-HyperX-HX426C16FB-16/dp/B06XKSPXHV/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&qid=1515693507&sr=8-16&keywords=kingston+fury+16GB
Click to expand...

I bought an i3 8100 to keep me up and running while I RMA my 8700k, and no, I never fried it to get a better one, had issues out of the box, and i can't known my i3 8100.

I had only 900 less 3DMark Time Spy graphics score 10400 over 11300 with it then my 8700k and it'll do 4000MHZ stable on the RAM.









And I can do 4K with G-Sync on with it, 57 FPS limited in game.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sanmayce*
> 
> Two suggestions I need:
> - best value (not best speeds) for 4x16GB DDR4;
> - best value Z370 mobo.
> 
> This year wanna buy Z370 motherboard paired with i3-8100 and 4x16GB, however seeing your @DStealth RAM specs, second thoughts arose.
> Since my use case is heavy RAM loads (compression) my intent is to fill the 4 slots to the max while looking for cheap choice (at the moment Kingston 2666MHz), so in order to save money from the expensive mobo $260 (Maximus X Hero) and RAM $1283 (on the shot below) my current pick is mobo $115 (Gigabyte) and RAM $760 (Kingston Fury). My request, could you run 7-zip benchmark (C:\>7za b), wanna compare with my humble scores.
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> D:\smashshop_2018-Jan-06>7za_v16.04_x64.exe b
> 
> 7-Zip (a) [64] 16.04 : Copyright (c) 1999-2016 Igor Pavlov : 2016-10-04
> 
> Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-7200U CPU @ 2.50GHz (806E9)
> CPU Freq:  2064  2064  4000  4000  2723  3282  2976  3121  3121
> 
> RAM size:    8092 MB,  # CPU hardware threads:   4
> RAM usage:    882 MB,  # Benchmark threads:      4
> 
> Compressing  |                  Decompressing
> Dict     Speed Usage    R/U Rating  |      Speed Usage    R/U Rating
> KiB/s     %   MIPS   MIPS  |      KiB/s     %   MIPS   MIPS
> 
> 22:       9422   310   2960   9166  |     106199   398   2275   9061
> 23:       9188   313   2991   9362  |     104759   398   2278   9064
> 24:       8997   318   3038   9674  |     103001   399   2266   9042
> 25:       8682   321   3084   9913  |     101883   398   2279   9067
> ----------------------------------  | ------------------------------
> Avr:             316   3018   9529  |              398   2274   9059
> Tot:             357   2646   9294
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/G-SKILL-TridentZ-PC4-26600-Platform-F4-3333C16Q-64GTZ/dp/B01DMZWPQ6/ref=sr_1_8?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1515692403&sr=1-8&keywords=g.skill+4000mhz
> 
> 
> VERSUS
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Kingston-Technology-HyperX-HX426C16FB-16/dp/B06XKSPXHV/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&qid=1515693507&sr=8-16&keywords=kingston+fury+16GB



5.2 8700K 4266c17 ram. ASUS Max 10 apex MB.


----------



## Sanmayce

Thank you _Jpmboy_,
useful since I still don't know how the 7-zip benchmark scales with CPU/Cache frequencies, as for the effect of RAM latency... dark India, still.

The quick dummy math, (4 threads @~2500MHz, 2133MHz cl15) vs (3x4 threads @~5200MHz, 2x2133MHz cl17):
Decompression:
*KB/s:* 499,092/101,883= 4.8x faster
*MIPS:* 44,417/9,067=4.8x faster

I always compare Decompression stats instead of Compression, the utilization of the former is nearly the number of threads x 100%, to draw conclusions it should be that way.
Maybe someone might consider opening a thread for reaching the highest Decompression MIPS, even my persona which digs into RAM so much for so long is ignorant of many aspects of decoding 7-zip benchmark results.

Hopefully, this year I will make the most in-depth benchmark of all brutal high-performance (sizewise) compressors - using 28GB and more in their insane modes.


----------



## Sanmayce

Really, the idea of having such a thread dedicated to 7-zip (32MB dictionary) is worth considering.

Just saw nice graphs, however these guys lack the internal stuff - the description of RAM settings, core/uncore, ...
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/asus-rog-maximus-x-apex-review,13.html



Funny, my i5-7200u cannot even enter the roster


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sanmayce*
> 
> Thank you _Jpmboy_,
> useful since I still don't know how the 7-zip benchmark scales with CPU/Cache frequencies, as for the effect of RAM latency... dark India, still.
> 
> The quick dummy math, (4 threads @~2500MHz, 2133MHz cl15) vs (3x4 threads @~5200MHz, 2x2133MHz cl17):
> Decompression:
> *KB/s:* 499,092/101,883= 4.8x faster
> *MIPS:* 44,417/9,067=4.8x faster
> 
> I always compare Decompression stats instead of Compression, the utilization of the former is nearly the number of threads x 100%, to draw conclusions it should be that way.
> Maybe someone might consider opening a thread for reaching the highest Decompression MIPS, even my persona which digs into RAM so much for so long is ignorant of many aspects of decoding 7-zip benchmark results.
> 
> Hopefully, this year I will make the most in-depth benchmark of all brutal high-performance (sizewise) compressors - using 28GB and more in their insane modes.


[email protected] ram at 4000c16


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sanmayce*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Thanks,
> Not wanna push it too hard..1,435v BIOS + LLC6
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two suggestions I need:
> - best value (not best speeds) for 4x16GB DDR4;
> - best value Z370 mobo.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> This year wanna buy Z370 motherboard paired with i3-8100 and 4x16GB, however seeing your @DStealth RAM specs, second thoughts arose.
> Since my use case is heavy RAM loads (compression) my intent is to fill the 4 slots to the max while looking for cheap choice (at the moment Kingston 2666MHz), so in order to save money from the expensive mobo $260 (Maximus X Hero) and RAM $1283 (on the shot below) my current pick is mobo $115 (Gigabyte) and RAM $760 (Kingston Fury). My request, could you run 7-zip benchmark (C:\>7za b), wanna compare with my humble scores.
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> D:\smashshop_2018-Jan-06>7za_v16.04_x64.exe b
> 
> 7-Zip (a) [64] 16.04 : Copyright (c) 1999-2016 Igor Pavlov : 2016-10-04
> 
> Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-7200U CPU @ 2.50GHz (806E9)
> CPU Freq:  2064  2064  4000  4000  2723  3282  2976  3121  3121
> 
> RAM size:    8092 MB,  # CPU hardware threads:   4
> RAM usage:    882 MB,  # Benchmark threads:      4
> 
> Compressing  |                  Decompressing
> Dict     Speed Usage    R/U Rating  |      Speed Usage    R/U Rating
> KiB/s     %   MIPS   MIPS  |      KiB/s     %   MIPS   MIPS
> 
> 22:       9422   310   2960   9166  |     106199   398   2275   9061
> 23:       9188   313   2991   9362  |     104759   398   2278   9064
> 24:       8997   318   3038   9674  |     103001   399   2266   9042
> 25:       8682   321   3084   9913  |     101883   398   2279   9067
> ----------------------------------  | ------------------------------
> Avr:             316   3018   9529  |              398   2274   9059
> Tot:             357   2646   9294
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/G-SKILL-TridentZ-PC4-26600-Platform-F4-3333C16Q-64GTZ/dp/B01DMZWPQ6/ref=sr_1_8?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1515692403&sr=1-8&keywords=g.skill+4000mhz
> 
> 
> VERSUS
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Kingston-Technology-HyperX-HX426C16FB-16/dp/B06XKSPXHV/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&qid=1515693507&sr=8-16&keywords=kingston+fury+16GB
Click to expand...

i3 8100 with G.Skill CL14 b-dies at 4000MHZ. 4x8GB


----------



## Sanmayce

Many thanks _Jpmboy_,
your benchmark gladdened my eyes









CANNOT BELIEVE Threadripper lags behind 360MB/s behind, BRUTALISIMO!
Big fan of AMD Threadripper I am, yet seeing this brutal domination, betrayal thoughts cross my mind, i9-7980XE rules!

The quick dummy math, (2cores/4threads @~2500MHz, 2133MHz cl15) vs (18cores/36threads @~4500MHz, 4000Hz cl16):
Decompression:
*KB/s:* 1,286,408/101,883= 12.6x faster
*MIPS:* 114,481/9,067= 12.6x faster

Utilization is excellent nearly 36x100%.

Thank you _KedarWolf_,
really wanted to see i3-8100 (my future workingdonkey) in action.

I have great respect for _Igor_'s work and skills, however he gave the 'resulting', AFAIU, as an average - this serves not purpose - actually the top score is meaningful and should be the final verdict.

The quick dummy math, (2cores/4threads @~2500MHz, 2133MHz cl15) vs (4cores/4threads @~3600MHz, 4000Hz):
Decompression:
*KB/s:* 172,210/101,883= 1.6x faster
*MIPS:* 15,326/9,067= 1.6x faster

Utilization is excellent nearly 400%.

Glad you made the runs.


----------



## Jpmboy

the threadripper is a MUCH better bang/buck. I wouldn't be down on it for the raw performance numbers there are other reasons - ram for one. I mean, until you've struggled with ryzen ram clocking you have not "kissed the donkey".


----------



## Scotty99

Im convinced now there is something wrong with either my delid (silicon lottery) or my AIO. With 1.392 (1.376v under load) it goes to 85c after ONE RUN of cinebench. If i wasnt so dam lazy i guess i could swap my be quiet dark rock pro 3 from my other system, actually that is probably what ill have to do to figure out these temps.


----------



## Scotty99

Welp fixed my temp problems, my AIO was GARBAGE. Just ran cb r15 after installing the be quiet cooler, max temps of 69c compared to 85c with the AIO.

Are any 240aio's comparable to a dual tower air cooler? I like these temps, but the be quiet takes up too much room in the case from an aesthetic point of view.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Welp fixed my temp problems, my AIO was GARBAGE. Just ran cb r15 after installing the be quiet cooler, max temps of 69c compared to 85c with the AIO.
> 
> Are any 240aio's comparable to a dual tower air cooler? I like these temps, but the be quiet takes up too much room in the case from an aesthetic point of view.


I'd think any working 240 AIO would do as good. What, the pump on the AIO died?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I'd think any working 240 AIO would do as good. What, the pump on the AIO died?


No it was working properly, pump was running off the cpu optional header at ~2300 rpm at all times, it just cooled that poorly. 15c drop by installing dual tower air cooler.


----------



## Jpmboy

bad block mount or something? R15, being so short duration, is a heat transfer thing, not actual cooling capacity. I'd try remounting the AIO block at least once - maybe a mount test with some contact paper or something to assess contact.


----------



## Scotty99

Oh i did that once before and even checked the paste distribution after mounting, all was a-ok. Its either outdone by air that much or its a defective unit.

And yes that was just a quick and dirty test but it was the same conditions, max 69c after one run of CB on air, 85c on AIO. I am guessing this time i will max out around 80c in a stress test, that is with my thirsty 8700k needing 1.392v to be stable at 5.0.

Side question, how exactly do you figure out what offset to enter to reach desired voltages with svid disabled?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> No it was working properly, pump was running off the cpu optional header at ~2300 rpm at all times, it just cooled that poorly. 15c drop by installing dual tower air cooler.


I had a simular issue with my H115i, temps would creep up slowly, even saw 91c with Cinebench.
Thought it was my thermal paste.

Turned out to be the H115i's mount, when I swapped it for my older Kraken x61 temps were perfect and have stayed exactly the same (ambient dependent).

Gets about 69c with Cinebench with the fans at 900rpm.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya its nutty, im gonna run the asus auto overclock software again just for kicks, i bet it dials in an OC over 5ghz since temps are so much lower.

All i have to say is air coolers ftw lol.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya its nutty, im gonna run the asus auto overclock software again just for kicks, i bet it dials in an OC over 5ghz since temps are so much lower.
> 
> All i have to say is air coolers ftw lol.


Nah, it seem some AIO's aren't making proper contact.

For me the paste looked fine when removing it, but a day after a repaste temps kept going up.
Thought it was my thermal paste at first, but now with the Kraken x61 proved it wasn't.

OCCT Large Data set at [email protected] sees a max temp of 54c, that's with the fans at the low 900rpm.


----------



## Scotty99

Ive never ran occt whats that comparable to in terms of load? 54c sounds like full on custom loop numbers.


----------



## Scotty99

I just wanted to add that this is now almost directly comparable to my ryzen 7 1700 in terms of temps, about 5c higher but it also has about .015v more volts running to it (1.382 on my ryzen).


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Oh i did that once before and even checked the paste distribution after mounting, all was a-ok. Its either outdone by air that much or its a defective unit.
> 
> And yes that was just a quick and dirty test but it was the same conditions, max 69c after one run of CB on air, 85c on AIO. I am guessing this time i will max out around 80c in a stress test, that is with my thirsty 8700k needing 1.392v to be stable at 5.0.
> 
> Side question, *how exactly do you figure out what offset to enter to reach desired voltages with svid disabled*?


you really do not want to disable SVID when using offset or adaptive voltage control.. since they work off the VID and need to communicate.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya its nutty, im gonna run the asus auto overclock software again just for kicks, i bet it dials in an OC over 5ghz since temps are so much lower.
> 
> *All i have to say is air coolers ftw* lol.


my NH D14 is still as good as any AIO I've tried... it's just HUGE!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ive never ran occt whats that comparable to in terms of load? 54c sounds like full on custom loop numbers.


you really don't need OCCT at this point. Use x264 for initial thermal/stability testing. OCCT is about the same as p95 and LinX in terms of current draw.


----------



## Scotty99

Hmm wish there was an adaptive or offset OC guide for these chips, all thats out there uses manual volts.

When i use svid enabled my cpu just does not perform as it should, ~150 points less in cinebench even tho throttling is not reported and clocks stay at 5000 during the entire run, so no idea what to say there.

In regards to OCCT, I was just curious how someone gets max 54c temps on a 240 aio in a stress test, that is well below any number ive heard thrown around when talking about 5.0ghz OC and voltages close to 1.4v. If that program is close to prime in terms of load schoolofmonkey must have the best 240aio ever made lol, 8 pack from OCuk got well over 70c with a 240 aio in prime:


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Hmm wish there was an adaptive or offset OC guide for these chips, all thats out there uses manual volts.
> 
> When i use svid enabled my cpu just does not perform as it should, ~150 points less in cinebench even tho throttling is reported and clocks stay at 5000 during the entire run, so no idea what to say there.
> 
> In regards to OCCT, I was just curious how someone gets max 54c temps on a 240 aio in a stress test, that is well below any number ive heard thrown around when talking about 5.0ghz OC and voltages close to 1.4v. If that program is close to prime in terms of load schoolofmonkey must have the best 240aio ever made lol, 8 pack from OCuk got well over 70c with a 240 aio in prime:


The Kraken x61 is a 280mm, and I have it with 4 Noctua's in push pull


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> The Kraken x61 is a 280mm, and I have it with 4 Noctua's in push pull


So if you just let prime go ham for an hour what temps does it max at? I have the option of trading my 1080ti for a hybrid model and that would allow me to put a 360 aio in the front of the case (looking at corsairs new model announced at CES) that should perform on par or a little better than a 280 with 4 fans.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Hmm wish there was an adaptive or offset OC guide for these chips, all thats out there uses manual volts.
> 
> When i use svid enabled my cpu just does not perform as it should, ~150 points less in cinebench even tho throttling is not reported and clocks stay at 5000 during the entire run, so no idea what to say there.
> 
> In regards to OCCT, I was just curious how someone gets max 54c temps on a 240 aio in a stress test, that is well below any number ive heard thrown around when talking about 5.0ghz OC and voltages close to 1.4v. If that program is close to prime in terms of load schoolofmonkey must have the best 240aio ever made lol, 8 pack from OCuk got well over 70c with a 240 aio in prime:


just leave CPU SVID on Auto. The auto rules work fine. Only other setting I use is disabled (with speed step and shift disabled) for benchmarking.. especially with BCLK OC.
For adaptive, just set LLC 5 or 6, then enter the same voltage that works for manual in the Turbo voltage field. Easy. set IA AC and IA DC load lines to 0.01 and you are good to go.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So if you just let prime go ham for an hour what temps does it max at? I have the option of trading my 1080ti for a hybrid model and that would allow me to put a 360 aio in the front of the case (looking at corsairs new model announced at CES) that should perform on par or a little better than a 280 with 4 fans.


54c is the max I see on the hottest core, with the side of my case on it was 60c








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> just leave CPU SVID on Auto. The auto rules work fine. Only other setting I use is disabled (with speed step and shift disabled) for benchmarking.. especially with BCLK OC.
> For adaptive, just set LLC 5 or 6, then enter the same voltage that works for manual in the Turbo voltage field. Easy. set IA AC and IA DC load lines to 0.01 and you are good to go.


I went back to using LLC 6, give me lower idle voltages, under heavy loads it will hit 1.376v, which is AVX stable.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> just leave CPU SVID on Auto. The auto rules work fine. Only other setting I use is disabled (with speed step and shift disabled) for benchmarking.. especially with BCLK OC.
> For adaptive, just set LLC 5 or 6, then enter the same voltage that works for manual in the Turbo voltage field. Easy. set IA AC and IA DC load lines to 0.01 and you are good to go.


Cool ill give that a shot later, right now im trying to diagnose ai suite problems (apparently windows update royally messed up old version lol).


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Cool ill give that a shot later, right now im trying to diagnose ai suite problems (apparently windows update royally messed up old version lol).


*there's a new version* out that fixes the w10 update issue.


----------



## Scotty99

Yup i stumbled upon that from a google search, its not even on asus's site yet and half the links for it are dead (great job asus!).

Anyways i got the adaptive mode working, but for some reason its loading at 1.408 instead of 1.392 with llc6. Ill just move the number down til its what i want









I still dont get how peoples temps are so low, im in a room that is temp controlled and in aida 64 extreme (only real stress test i have on my PC) it peaks to over 80c. If i had my aio on there it would be thermal throttling with these volts. My overclock is exactly what debauers guide lists, except tweaks to svid and adaptive voltage that jpm suggested.

Edit, btw what do people get in the CPU-z benchmark? My cb score seems fine (1640 with cas 15 3000 ram) but cpu-z multi is 4450 and single is 570.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yup i stumbled upon that from a google search, its not even on asus's site yet and half the links for it are dead (great job asus!).
> 
> Anyways i got the adaptive mode working, but for some reason its loading at 1.408 instead of 1.392 with llc6. Ill just move the number down til its what i want
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I still dont get how peoples temps are so low, im in a room that is temp controlled and in aida 64 extreme (only real stress test i have on my PC) it peaks to over 80c. If i had my aio on there it would be thermal throttling with these volts. My overclock is exactly what debauers guide lists, except tweaks to svid and adaptive voltage that jpm suggested.


I have a 360 RAD and pump with an EK EVO waterblock for my CPU.









Now just waiting on my 8700k Intel RMA, it had issues out of the box.









Running a cheap i3 8100 until RMA goes through.

Strangely enough in Time Spy I only score 900 points less in the graphics score on my 1080 Ti that the 8700k.









10400 to 11300.


----------



## Scotty99

Honestly if it wasnt for WoW id just sell this intel pc and use my ryzen its surprisingly far easier to tune lol. WoW results are just insane tho, i get 30-40% more fps with the coffee lake machine, its night and day and completely noticeable on my 165hz monitor.

Almost all of my other games are 100% gpu bound being a play at 1440p, same results on ryzen as intel.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yup i stumbled upon that from a google search, its not even on asus's site yet and half the links for it are dead (great job asus!).
> 
> Anyways i got the adaptive mode working, but for some reason its loading at 1*.408 instead of 1.392* with llc6. Ill just move the number down til its what i want
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I still dont get how peoples temps are so low, im in a room that is temp controlled and in aida 64 extreme (only real stress test i have on my PC) it peaks to over 80c. If i had my aio on there it would be thermal throttling with these volts. My overclock is exactly what debauers guide lists, except tweaks to svid and adaptive voltage that jpm suggested.
> 
> Edit, btw what do people get in the CPU-z benchmark? My cb score seems fine (1640 with cas 15 3000 ram) but cpu-z multi is 4450 and single is 570.


that 16mV difference is the result of the 8 bit report from teh sio to cpuZ or any other software in the OS. It will jump in 16mV increments (only). your "actual" voltage is between the two.Use LLC 5 if you are using 6 right now. Should droop l;ower under load.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Honestly if it wasnt for WoW id just sell this intel pc and use my ryzen its surprisingly far easier to tune lol. WoW results are just insane tho, i get 30-40% more fps with the coffee lake machine, its night and day and completely noticeable on my 165hz monitor.
> 
> Almost all of my other games are 100% gpu bound being a play at 1440p, same results on ryzen as intel.


it may be that the delid is fouled... those temps are quite high for a delidded 8700K at that voltage even with an air cooler. SL has a warranty on their delids. If you did not but it from them, just redo the liquid metal.


----------



## Scotty99

I had SL do the delid but it was my CPU, think i will contact them.

BTW what does the IA load lines accomplish, its just one thing that differs from debauers guide


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Just flashed 1003 UEFI on MXF so far adaptive voltage seems better but still no monitoring for VRM temperature. Also XMP VCCIO and VCCSA "auto" puts both these voltages way high 1.312V and 1.25V respectively.


On my MXF I can see VRM temps in HWInfo.

Couldn't on a Hero though.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> On my MXF I can see VRM temps in HWInfo.
> 
> Couldn't on a Hero though.


Which value in HWinfo?
NVM found it Asus EC


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> On my MXF I can see VRM temps in HWInfo.
> 
> Couldn't on a Hero though.
> 
> 
> 
> Which value in HWinfo?
Click to expand...

I run 'Sensors Only' at startup, accept the Asus prompt, and it's here.

If you don't get those prompts try resetting the preferences in Settings at startup.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I run 'Sensors Only' at startup, accept the Asus prompt, and it's here.
> 
> If you don't get those prompts try resetting the preferences in Settings at startup.


Still doesnt show up in AIDA64 though







maybe with the next update


----------



## Scotty99

Stress testing is for the birds, just downloaded prime 26.6 as that seems to be the goto version without avx, 15 mins max temps of 75c with 1.392v zero errors or warnings reported by prime 95. Scroll down in HWinfo64 and i have 2 whea uncorrectable errors lol.

Do i trust HWinfo or prime95 lmao?


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KedarWolf*
> 
> I run 'Sensors Only' at startup, accept the Asus prompt, and it's here.
> 
> If you don't get those prompts try resetting the preferences in Settings at startup.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still doesnt show up in AIDA64 though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> maybe with the next update
Click to expand...

Try HWInfo.


----------



## Scotty99

Wonder how many people claim stability but arent really, just raised volts so under load it fluctuates between 1.392-1.408 and after another 15 mins of p26.6 zero errors or warnings, max temps of 77c........yet i got one whea error in hwinfo64.

Do people check for whea errors or nah?



http://imgur.com/fPweK8l


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Wonder how many people claim stability but arent really, just raised volts so under load it fluctuates between 1.392-1.408 and after another 15 mins of p26.6 zero errors or warnings, max temps of 77c........yet i got one whea error in hwinfo64.
> 
> Do people check for whea errors or nah?
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/fPweK8l


Personally I always check for errors


----------



## Scotty99

And im sure some do, but most guides dont tell you to open hwinfo and check for them. People will just see that prime did not show any errors or warnings (like my screenshot shows above) nor did their pc crash, so to them its stable.

Overclocking is a funny business, especially when trying to compare results of others over the interwebs.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> And im sure some do, but most guides dont tell you to open hwinfo and check for them. People will just see that prime did not show any errors or warnings (like my screenshot shows above) nor did their pc crash, so to them its stable.
> 
> Overclocking is a funny business, especially when trying to compare results of others over the interwebs.


And others call 1 hour of XTU stress test stable, everyone has a different opinion


----------



## Scotty99

Ya, maybe im just salty my 8700k is so bad lol.

Side note, i realize 26.6 prime is non avx but im surprised how cool my cpu stays during it with 1.4v. CPU-z built in stress test gets my cpu hotter, and some games nearly do as well.


----------



## Scotty99

So i think i finally have a stable 5ghz 8700k, 20mins of prime 26.5 (thought i had 26.6, whatever lol) i had zero errors or warning from prime and no whea errors noted on hwinfo. This took me setting 1.4v in the bios, under load its 1.408-1.424 (most of the time it sits at 1.408). Ill let it sit overnite just to make sure, temps were max 78c during that 20 mins, not bad for a 1.4v 8700k with an air cooler?

A lot of volts for 5.0ghz but if you go by silicon lotterys site that 72% number is using 1.4v as well.


----------



## Rowethren

I checked for WHEA when going for stable and it made me have to increase voltage quite a bit to stop them. I could pass Realbench 1 hour at 1.324 but to stop WHEA I had to run at 1.360. Temps max out at around 71°C with 18 ambient and fans at ~600RPM.


----------



## Scotty99

I guess its up to the person what they consider stable. Ever since my ryzen pc tho ive kind of relied on HWinfo (i know you can check in windows too, hwinfo is easier) to check for whea errors. If i was oblivious to them i could call my 8700k stable at a much lower voltage as well.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I had SL do the delid but it was my CPU, think i will contact them.
> 
> BTW what does the IA load lines accomplish, its just one thing that differs from debauers guide


adjusts the way turbo is added to the VID. if you board has it, set CPU SVID to "Best Case.."
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Stress testing is for the birds, just downloaded prime 26.6 as that seems to be the goto version without avx, 15 mins max temps of 75c with 1.392v zero errors or warnings reported by prime 95. Scroll down in HWinfo64 and i have 2 whea uncorrectable errors lol.
> 
> Do i trust HWinfo or prime95 lmao?


neither. prime won;t log correctable errors, and in many cases HWI reports data that does not exist... from non existent sensors. it is best to use the most recent p95 and use an AVX offset.


----------



## gammagoat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So i think i finally have a stable 5ghz 8700k, 20mins of prime 26.5 (thought i had 26.6, whatever lol) i had zero errors or warning from prime and no whea errors noted on hwinfo. This took me setting 1.4v in the bios, under load its 1.408-1.424 (most of the time it sits at 1.408). Ill let it sit overnite just to make sure, temps were max 78c during that 20 mins, not bad for a 1.4v 8700k with an air cooler?
> 
> A lot of volts for 5.0ghz but if you go by silicon lotterys site that 72% number is using 1.4v as well.


Your chip is the first one I've seen that makes me feel better about mine.









@5.0 , 1.385 bios, LLC 6, vcore windows 1.392, with the occasional jump to 1.408. This is with the newest BIOS, 5GHZ wasn't possible before.

CPU runs cool with a delid and NH-D15s, max 76c.

CPU seems to be really temp sensitive, anything more than high 70's and instability begins.

I have all the components for a custom loop(hardware labs 560mm rad, d5 pump and raystorm pro block), just lack the motivation to put it all together. I do wonder though if 5.1 maybe possible with this cooling setup. Or maybe be able to lower vcore.


----------



## gammagoat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> adjusts the way turbo is added to the VID. if you board has it, set CPU SVID to "Best Case.."
> neither. prime won;t log correctable errors, and in many cases HWI reports data that does not exist... from non existent sensors. it is best to use the most recent p95 and use an AVX offset.


Okay so how do you test a 5ghz OC? With an AVX offset clocks drop immediately.

Is it not better for those of us that have chips that will not run 5ghz AVX stable to at least ensure that non-AVX loads are stable? Considering that most of daily use will be under non-AVX loads.

I really don't know and have been wondering about this.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> Okay so how do you test a 5ghz OC? With an AVX offset clocks drop immediately.
> 
> Is it not better for those of us that have chips that will not run 5ghz AVX stable to at least ensure that non-AVX loads are stable? Considering that *most of daily use will be under non-AVX loads*.
> 
> I really don't know and have been wondering about this.


Absolutely. The latest p95 has some bug fixes. You can simply disable AVX/FMA3 by adding two of the following commands to the local .txt file as explained in the undoc.txt file (AVX and FMA3 lines):
_The program supports many different code paths for LL testing depending on
the CPU type. It also has a few different factoring code paths. You can
force the program to choose a specific code path by setting the proper
combination of these settings in local.txt:
CpuSupportsRDTSC=0 or 1
CpuSupportsCMOV=0 or 1
CpuSupportsPrefetch=0 or 1
CpuSupportsSSE=0 or 1
CpuSupportsSSE2=0 or 1
CpuSupports3DNow=0 or 1
CpuSupportsAVX=0 or 1
CpuSupportsFMA3=0 or 1
CpuSupportsFMA4=0 or 1
CpuSupportsAVX2=0 or 1
CpuSupportsAVX512F=0 or 1_

then - you can re-enable any/all of the instruction sets for AVX (or what ever instruction set) you want to test next.

Alternatively, just use *x264* (avx, no avx512) which is a much more reasonable way to test the AVX and non-AVX clocks. do 20 loops and set the number of threads to 1.5x the actual thread count.
Many modern games do use AVX/FMA3 for physics (512 not yet) but NONE use it to hammer the FPU like p95 does, which is why I usually avoid p95 for stability testing.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 
> 5.2 8700K 4266c17 ram. ASUS Max 10 apex MB.


As already stated get 1700/1700x @3900-4000 for archiving and any 2900-3100 ram will get similar to 370+8700k results cheaper cooler after price drop from AMD for such task is perfect.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> As already stated get 1700/1700x @3900-4000 for archiving and any 2900-3100 ram will get similar to 370+8700k results cheaper cooler after price drop from AMD for such task is perfect.


yep.. but you probably want to run more than one loop. the post I made was at 5.2GHz And it's clear that ryzen does well in this bench (one of the few)


----------



## DStealth

Yea- yea my post was for the one you quoted...
50+ are normal for 8700к@5.5 and even sub 4Ghz ram


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Yea- *yea my post was for the one you quoted*...
> 50+ are normal for 8700к@5.5 and even sub 4Ghz ram


huh?








anywho... enjoy.


----------



## DStealth




----------



## Sanmayce

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yep.. but you probably want to run more than one loop. the post I made was at 5.2GHz And it's clear that ryzen does well in this bench (one of the few)


Thank you _DStealth_ for the shot, very informative, all the stats are there.

_>As already stated get 1700/1700x @3900-4000 for archiving and any 2900-3100 ram will get similar to 370+8700k results..._



How come, something is not right, that would mean higher multi-threaded IPC for AMD, who can show this is the case?!
As _Igor_ stated in his homepage, he tried to run more threads in 7-zip compression (than the actually available) in order to saturate the load.
SO, compression stats are not that indicative, on top of that AMD 1700 has:
Total L1 Cache: 8x96KB = 768KB
Total L2 Cache: 8x512KB = 4MB
Total L3 Cache: 16MB
whereas Intel 8700K has:
Total L1 Cache: 6x64KB = 384KB
Total L2 Cache: 6x256KB = 1.5MB
Total L3 Cache: 12MB

For compression latency is a major factor when using 32MB window (outside the caches that is). And of course bigger caches lower the latency multi-fold.
The thing that interests me is the role of the superspeedy RAM, meaning of course latencywise, 30-50MB/s encoding rates cannot benefit much from 25 vs 50GB/s bandwidths.
My point, 8700K @5GHz looks much better than AMD @4GHz, despite all the differences, kinda like to compare apples with plums.


----------



## Sanmayce

Don't wanna furthermore to pollute this thread, so created the dedicated 7-zip thread, was reluctant to do so since I have no access to modern strong machines, yet, did it:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1645638/highest-mips-screenshots-of-7-zip-built-in-benchmark/0_50


----------



## Scotty99

Does anyone with a strix-f know how to simply get all cores to run at 4.7? Neither asus mce enabled or disabled accomplishes this.

5.0 is stable, but not sure i wanna run 1.4v daily yet.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Does anyone with a strix-f know how to simply get all cores to run at 4.7? Neither asus mce enabled or disabled accomplishes this.
> 
> 5.0 is stable, but not sure i wanna run 1.4v daily yet.


set the bios to "Synch All Cores" and set 47 at the multiplier. The default/stock clocks on the 8700K is not 4.7 on all cores, and multicoreenhancement is not gonna do so.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> set the bios to "Synch All Cores" and set 47 at the multiplier. The default/stock clocks on the 8700K is not 4.7 on all cores, and multicoreenhancement is not gonna do so.


Hmmm the way i understood it is that is exactly what multicore enhancement aims to do. Asus mce off is supposed to be intel stock turbo ratios, mce enabled is supposed to boost all cores to 4.7 but it does not on my board.

Of course i know i can just manually set it, i just wanted to see what kind of volts the board was going to designate for a 4.7ghz OC.


----------



## Scotty99

Oh btw for you wow players i decided to do a test. I wanted to rule graphics card out entirely and as i suspected intel just plays the game that much better with the 1060 from my amd machine installed.. Same zone same people this intel machine gets nearly *double* the fps of my ryzen. This is not down to just ipc or clockrates either, amd simply plays wow terribly, worse or on par as my old 2500k with a slight overclock. All of my other games simply do not care what cpu i have at 1440p, even destiny (which is also an mmo-ish style game) plays only slightly better with the 1060 installed in intel rig.

If you play at 1440p, literally the only reason to buy intel is for old games......which i find kind of funny.


----------



## Rowethren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Oh btw for you wow players i decided to do a test. I wanted to rule graphics card out entirely and as i suspected intel just plays the game that much better with the 1060 from my amd machine installed.. Same zone same people this intel machine gets nearly *double* the fps of my ryzen. This is not down to just ipc or clockrates either, amd simply plays wow terribly, worse or on par as my old 2500k with a slight overclock. All of my other games simply do not care what cpu i have at 1440p, even destiny (which is also an mmo-ish style game) plays only slightly better with the 1060 installed in intel rig.
> 
> If you play at 1440p, literally the only reason to buy intel is for old games......which i find kind of funny.


Lucky the old games are normally better and I seem to end up playing then the most









Usually a combination of Kotor1/2, Oblivion, Jedi Knight (all of them), Half Life and so many more... Most modern games can't live up to them especially once you start to mod!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Hmmm the way i understood it is that is exactly what multicore enhancement aims to do. Asus mce off is supposed to be intel stock turbo ratios, mce enabled is supposed to boost all cores to 4.7 but it does not on my board.
> 
> Of course i know i can just manually set it, *i just wanted to see what kind of volts the board was going to designate for a 4.7ghz OC*.


And it doe the same on my board as your. Asus MCE improves intel mce for "per core" , but is not the same as synch all cores - . setting synch all core and voltage/svid on auto will give you the answer you are looking for.


----------



## Emmett

Adaptive voltage

On my MXFormula with bios set to defaults. I can select adaptive and enter my CPU total voltage.
On my MXApex I do the same, but total voltage is grayed out and it says "by CPU" ?

What Am i missing?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Emmett*
> 
> Adaptive voltage
> 
> On my MXFormula with bios set to defaults. I can select adaptive and enter my CPU total voltage.
> On my MXApex I do the same, but total voltage is grayed out and it says "by CPU" ?
> 
> What Am i missing?


is cpu svid on auto/enabled? AI Tuner to Manual?


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> Your chip is the first one I've seen that makes me feel better about mine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @5.0 , 1.385 bios, LLC 6, vcore windows 1.392, with the occasional jump to 1.408. This is with the newest BIOS, 5GHZ wasn't possible before.
> 
> CPU runs cool with a delid and NH-D15s, max 76c.
> 
> CPU seems to be really temp sensitive, anything more than high 70's and instability begins.
> 
> I have all the components for a custom loop(hardware labs 560mm rad, d5 pump and raystorm pro block), just lack the motivation to put it all together. I do wonder though if 5.1 maybe possible with this cooling setup. Or maybe be able to lower vcore.


Then let me enter the race for WORST 8700K =)

Turns out my 5Ghz wasn't stable even on 1.38, while doing Hyper PI 32M it started to trow WHEA errors, and I won't try higher voltages because with 1.38 I'm already getting peaks of 85C when stressing on Hyper PI (delid + liquid metal + EVGA CLC 280 AIO, but to be fair it's 30 C here today, so not sure if there is anything wrong with those temps at 1.38v)

The max I can do is 4.8 0 offset with 1.285 and will peak 75C

I think I will try to sell this **** and lose some money and try again.

EDIT: ok, I was able to pass Hyper PI 32M with 5Ghz at 1.39v, and the temperature peak was still on 85C. Also discovered that my memories can do 3400 with same timing so it's good, may try a little higher tomorrow.

PS: i'm using Hyper PI because it seems the first one to trow WEAH errors, I may try x264 also to see if it's stable.

Either way, not sure if those temps are normal considering it's a delid + AIO 280 mm (30 C outside)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Then let me enter the race for WORST 8700K =)
> 
> Turns out my 5Ghz wasn't stable even on 1.38, while doing Hyper PI 32M it started to trow WHEA errors, and I won't try higher voltages because with 1.38 I'm already getting peaks of 85C when stressing on Hyper PI (delid + liquid metal + EVGA CLC 280 AIO, but to be fair it's 30 C here today, so not sure if there is anything wrong with those temps at 1.38v)
> 
> The max I can do is 4.8 0 offset with 1.285 and will peak 75C
> 
> I think I will try to sell this **** and lose some money and try again.
> 
> EDIT: ok, I was able to pass Hyper PI 32M with 5Ghz at 1.39v, and the temperature peak was still on 85C. Also discovered that my memories can do 3400 with same timing so it's good, may try a little higher tomorrow.
> 
> PS: i'm using Hyper PI because it seems the first one to trow WEAH errors, I may try x264 also to see if it's stable.
> 
> Either way, not sure if those temps are normal considering it's a delid + AIO 280 mm (30 C outside)


these chips are very sensitive to temperature. I just ran hyp Pi 32M at 1.38V (5.2 = ~130W power) and the peak temp on any core is below 60C.. however, the Ram temperature is getting up there. I removed the ram fan for this test - it's an open bench. So, yes, that cpu is running hot.. I'd bet the delid has fouled somehow. Second, ram may be having thermal errors. redo the delid mount th ecooler with a good paste (TGK, Gelid, PK) and put a fan on the ram... cpu may be better than you think. On the other hand, nothing wrong with trying another cpu.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> these chips are very sensitive to temperature. I just ran hyp Pi 32M at 1.38V (5.2 = ~130W power) and the peak temp on any core is below 60C.. however, the Ram temperature is getting up there. I removed the ram fan for this test - it's an open bench. So, yes, that cpu is running hot.. I'd bet the delid has fouled somehow. Second, ram may be having thermal errors. redo the delid mount th ecooler with a good paste (TGK, Gelid, PK) and put a fan on the ram... cpu may be better than you think. On the other hand, nothing wrong with trying another cpu.


Yeah I may try to re-delid. Did you closed your HIS with super glue gel or silicon?

The thermal is good, I'm using thermal grizzly conductonaut.

But I don't have a RAM fan, neither a VRM fan, are you using one on the VRM's also? I have no idea what's the VRM temps here as it doesn't show up even on HWiNFO64 =/


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Yeah I may try to re-delid. Did you closed your HIS with super glue gel or silicon?
> 
> The thermal is good, I'm using thermal grizzly conductonaut.
> 
> But I don't have a RAM fan, neither a VRM fan, are you using one on the VRM's also? I have no idea what's the VRM temps here as it doesn't show up even on HWiNFO64 =/


i use silicon on the IHS, but just a small dab at each corner. HyperPi wil warm things up somewhat, and if the air flow is poor in the case (like it usually is with an AIO or custom water) the power section and dram can get warm which can lead to WHEA (correctable and uncorrectable whea). Yes, I normally run a fan on the dram (it's attached to the DIMM.2 card. And I have one on the VRM mount on this APEX.
Try using AID64 for the vrm temps.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> i use silicon on the IHS, but just a small dab at each corner. HyperPi wil warm things up somewhat, and if the air flow is poor in the case (like it usually is with an AIO or custom water) the power section and dram can get warm which can lead to WHEA (correctable and uncorrectable whea). Yes, I normally run a fan on the dram (it's attached to the DIMM.2 card. And I have one on the VRM mount on this APEX.
> Try using AID64 for the vrm temps.


Alright, good to know. I'll try to re-delid and put some VRM and RAM fans.

No VRM on Ainda64 either, I'll try to update to the last bios as I'm still on 802


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Alright, good to know. I'll try to re-delid and put some VRM and RAM fans.
> 
> No VRM on Ainda64 either, I'll try to update to the last bios as I'm still on 802


it may be that the Hero either does not have a DTS on the VRM array, or the signal is not recognized (yet) =by software. SIV64 does not see the APEX vrm temperature, so it's hit or miss.


----------



## Scotty99

I have no idea where to find vrm temps for the strix-f either.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I have no idea where to find vrm temps for the strix-f either.


Strix-F doesn't have VRM senors...


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ This

but honestly, the VRMs on z370 are not to worry about, any reasonable airflow over the heatsinks is enough. They just do not get hot. (now, x299 is a different story







).


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ^^ This
> 
> but honestly, the VRMs on z370 are not to worry about, any reasonable airflow over the heatsinks is enough. They just do not get hot. (now, x299 is a different story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ).


Amen to that brother.









There's a fan mount for the VRM's that comes with the Strix-F, just whack a 80mm fan on that and you'll never have to worry about the VRM temps.
Mine never got that hot when I was stressing at [email protected], that was with the "touch test"


----------



## Scotty99

Oh for sure i wasnt worried, was just curious....that answers that lol. Wonder why they dont have sensors? Even my cheap am4 board has them.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Oh for sure i wasnt worried, was just curious....that answers that lol. Wonder why they dont have sensors? Even my cheap am4 board has them.


Just remember the Strix-F doesn't have Q-Code LED's either, it's just a entry level board, still a ok board though


----------



## GeneO

Anybody know if the Asus X Code has VRM sensors? I have one on the way.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> Anybody know if the Asus X Code has VRM sensors? I have one on the way.


Yep


----------



## GeneO

Yeah, I saw that, but that is marketing. Is it really there?


----------



## Emmett

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> is cpu svid on auto/enabled? AI Tuner to Manual?


reset to defaults. AI tuner to manual. SVID Auto, tried enabled also.

total adaptive voltage says in gray 'by CPU'

If I change the offset above to 0.001 the 'by CPU' changes to 0.250 !

Something doesnt seem right,

bios 1003 BTW


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> Yeah, I saw that, but that is marketing. Is it really there?


The Maximus X Hero, Formula and Code all have VRM sensors and do show up in HWinfo through the Asus EC Bus, BUT AIDA64 do not use the EC bus as according to them monitoring the EC Bus can cause undesirable instability, until VRM temp is monitored by the UEFI AIDA64 will not show VRM temperatures


----------



## GeneO

Thnx


----------



## Scotty99

Edit: Spoke too soon, loaded up overwatch and temps are 10-12c higher than air cooler.

Le sigh lol.


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> The Maximus X Hero, Formula and Code all have VRM sensors and do show up in HWinfo through the Asus EC Bus, BUT AIDA64 do not use the EC bus as according to them monitoring the EC Bus can cause undesirable instability, until VRM temp is monitored by the UEFI AIDA64 will not show VRM temperatures


Well, my Maximus X Hero disagrees with that statement


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> Well, my Maximus X Hero disagrees with that statement


Which UEFI are you running? It works with 1003


----------



## Scotty99

I have that sensor ignored because hwinfo suggested i do so, will vrm temps show up there eventually?


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Which UEFI are you running? It works with 1003


VRM temp has never showed up on none of the bios versions I've flahed, yes I'm currently on 1003

I'm not the only one https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?97864-Maximus-Hero-X


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> VRM temp has never showed up on none of the bios versions I've flahed, yes I'm currently on 1003
> 
> I'm not the only one https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?97864-Maximus-Hero-X[/quote
> That's odd because some members here with MXH boards have reported it as working.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Emmett*
> 
> reset to defaults. AI tuner to manual. SVID Auto, tried enabled also.
> 
> total adaptive voltage says in gray 'by CPU'
> 
> If I change the offset above to 0.001 the 'by CPU' changes to 0.250 !
> 
> Something doesn't seem right
> 
> bios 1003 BTW


Offset is below turbo - right? Put a usb stick in any port, then post to bios and on that screen hit F12. Boot to windows and on the usb stick there will be a bios screen shot bmp file. post that here. Need to see what's going on there. Something ain't right.
bios 1003 here too:


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> *I have that sensor ignored because hwinfo suggested i do so,* will vrm temps show up there eventually?


lol - that the sensor com needed to see it if it is there.


----------



## Rowethren

VRM temps aren't shown on my MHX either hasn't shown on any of the BIOS I have tried (203,505,802,1003).


----------



## Jpmboy




----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


Nice so how did you manage to get AIDA64 to show VRM temperature? I don't have that as an option and have set AIDA64 to show EC bus.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Nice so how did you manage to get AIDA64 to show VRM temperature? I don't have that as an option and have set AIDA64 to show EC bus.


first, check in bios that vrm is monitored

if you see vrm in bios, then:

and


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> first, check in bios that vrm is monitored
> 
> if you see vrm in bios, then:
> 
> and


Thanks for that, that's what I thought however VRM is not monitored in UEFI 1003 for the MXF unlike your Apex, hopefully Asus will address this in the next UEFI.


----------



## Emmett

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Offset is below turbo - right? Put a usb stick in any port, then post to bios and on that screen hit F12. Boot to windows and on the usb stick there will be a bios screen shot bmp file. post that here. Need to see what's going on there. Something ain't right.
> bios 1003 here too:
> 
> 
> lol - that the sensor com needed to see it if it is there.


Oh wow, my bad, I was sure I entered total adaptive voltage right into that line that stayed gray for me.
I entered it like you and it shows up..

LOL.

Thanks for the help.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Thanks for that, that's what I thought however VRM is not monitored in UEFI 1003 for the MXF unlike your Apex, hopefully Asus will address this in the next UEFI.


erm... i suspect that if the board has a dts on the vrm array, bios would show it. Are you saying that earlier bioses had VRM Temp in bios show up?
Anyway - again, VRM temp on this platform is not something to be concerned about.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> erm... i suspect that if the board has a dts on the vrm array, bios would show it. Are you saying that earlier bioses had VRM Temp in bios show up?
> Anyway - again, VRM temp on this platform is not something to be concerned about.


None of the UEFI versions for the Maximus X Formula have had the VRM temperature appear under the monitoring tab in the UEFI, however my Maximus VIII Formula always had that function, HWinfo64 does allow for monitoring of VRM temperature on MXF through the EC bus but AIDA64 does not, according to AIDA64 forums until Asus have the VRM temperature monitored in the UEFI their software will not be able to monitor VRM temps, which confirms what you said


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> *This thread is for sharing experience on the Z370 platform and for support on all ASUS Z370 boards.
> If requesting support, please try to use the following template (or at the very least have rig builder filled out):*
> 
> 
> Motherboard model:
> UEFI Version:
> CPU:
> Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB:
> GPU:
> SSD/HDDs/Optical drives:
> PSU:
> USB Devices (model/version number):
> Monitor:
> CPU Cooler:
> PC CASE:
> Operating system: Microsoft Activated yes/no?
> Drivers Installed (include version):
> Any third Party temp/voltage software installed:
> System Overclocked (provide details)?
> 
> *Boards:*
> 
> *ROG MAXIMUS X APEX*
> *ROG STRIX Z370-E GAMING*
> *ASUS PRIME Z370-A*
> *ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC)*
> *ROG STRIX Z370-I GAMING*
> *ROG MAXIMUS X HERO*
> *TUF Z370-PRO GAMING*
> *TUF Z370-PLUS GAMING*
> *ROG STRIX Z370-F GAMING*
> *ROG STRIX Z370-H GAMING*
> *PRIME Z370-P*
> 
> Nov 13, 2017: New Bioses: http://www.overclock.net/t/1640168/asus-z370-motherboard-series-official-support-thread/100_20#post_26446009
> Nov 15, 2017: Bios Patches: http://www.overclock.net/t/1640168/asus-z370-motherboard-series-official-support-thread/120_20#post_26449686
> *
> ROG Maximus Apex Extreme OC*
> 
> *Coffee-Lake batch info* via @aerotracks (in German)
> 
> Bios flashback for HeroWiFi: http://www.overclock.net/t/1640168/asus-z370-motherboard-series-official-support-thread/740_20#post_26527916
> (correct name is M10Hwifi.cap)


Missing Maximus X CODE


----------



## Essenbe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> Missing Maximus X CODE


And Formula, unless I missed it.


----------



## outofmyheadyo

Is there a way to import memory profiles to rog x hero? I remember seeing some custom profiles with asus amd boards for b-die chips.


----------



## renhanxue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rowethren*
> 
> VRM temps aren't shown on my MHX either hasn't shown on any of the BIOS I have tried (203,505,802,1003).


My MXH (wifi) has a VRM temp sensor, but only via the EC bus as others have stated. HWinfo64 can monitor it. Not really much of a concern though.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> Missing Maximus X CODE


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Essenbe*
> 
> And Formula, unless I missed it.


^^ thx. added


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Essenbe*
> 
> And Formula, unless I missed it.


Got a Code and 870 k and I am waiting for the memory Steverooo. 32 GB, Trident Z 3200 CL14.


----------



## Essenbe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> Got a Code and 870 k and I am waiting for the memory Steverooo. 32 GB, Trident Z 3200 CL14.


I have 16 GB of that. It's good memory, overclocks like a champ on my Apex.


----------



## chibi

Hmm my delidded 8700K seems kind of a dud. It can pass 8hours Realbench v2.56 at 5.0GHz (0 AVX Offset) at 1.32V. But setting the cache up to 48, still gets WHEA CPU Cache errors with 1.35V.









Going to find a stable 5.0/4.8 overclock just to have the numbers as reference, then will consider downclocking the cache with more reasonable cpu volts


----------



## sew333

My mobo is Asus Z370 Pro Gaming.
And rams: Gskill 2x8GB 2133mhz ( XMP 3000mhz ).
Cpu 8700K.

When i choose in UEFI first time XMP profile i saved and booted fine to UEFI. I turn off pc,turn on again after 2 hours, and then, i met screen:

THE SYSTEM HAS POSTED IN SAFE MODE. This happened just once. Now its booting fine,but i dont know why it booted just once with this message.

This is screen from internet ,but the same msg:



My psu also is Corsair 750RM i

I tried to reproduce this warning but i am not able to do that. Reverting to standard and then again to XMP save. Turn off pc by power button. But not warning. Any ideas why it happened just once,and still its something wrong?

Memtest not showing errors.

Worry about this?


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sew333*
> 
> My mobo is Asus Z370 Pro Gaming.
> And rams: Gskill 2x8GB 2133mhz ( XMP 3000mhz ).
> Cpu 8700K.
> 
> When i choose in UEFI first time XMP profile i saved and booted fine to UEFI. I turn off pc,turn on again after 2 hours, and then, i met screen:
> 
> THE SYSTEM HAS POSTED IN SAFE MODE. This happened just once. Now its booting fine,but i dont know why it booted just once with this message.
> 
> This is screen from internet ,but the same msg:
> 
> 
> 
> My psu also is Corsair 750RM i
> 
> I tried to reproduce this warning but i am not able to do that. Reverting to standard and then again to XMP save. Turn off pc by power button. But not warning. Any ideas why it happened just once,and still its something wrong?
> 
> Memtest not showing errors.
> 
> Worry about this?


How long did u run memtest for? Also may be SA/IO needs tweaking


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> Well, my Maximus X Hero disagrees with that statement


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renhanxue*
> 
> My MXH (wifi) has a VRM temp sensor, but only via the EC bus as others have stated. HWinfo64 can monitor it. Not really much of a concern though.


My MXH (wifi) VRM sensor is not showing up in HWINFO either. BIOS 1003.



Hey Bloot - Look! We both have Corsair H110i coolers. Yours must be an older one that still says H110i-GT. I have one of those in my X99 rig.


----------



## sew333

When i left pc off for a day or night, and boot i met message:THE SYSTEM HAS POSTED IN SAFE MODE



Any ideas? I read on some russion forum with the same issue with other user and he also using XMP profile and without.

Just translate:

https://forums.overclockers.ru/viewtopic.php?p=14838247


----------



## renhanxue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> My MXH (wifi) VRM sensor is not showing up in HWINFO either. BIOS 1003.


Huh. That's weird. I'm on BIOS 1003 too and mine shows up right there:


----------



## SpeedyIV

Yeah there is a thread going on about this on the ROG forum as well. Sams thread posted earlier by Bloot. People there have been PM'ing RAJA but so far no response. I checked the SIV Sensor Debug panel and AIDA64 as well. No VRM sensor. I am not terribly worried about it but it is odd. More of an OCD issue. I suspect there may be some setting in the BIOS that is causing this to show up or not. My 1003 BIOS at the moment is at defaults and I am not getting a VRM sensor value. I will go into the BIOS and poke around.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?97864-Maximus-Hero-X


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sew333*
> 
> My mobo is Asus Z370 Pro Gaming.
> And rams: Gskill 2x8GB 2133mhz ( XMP 3000mhz ).
> Cpu 8700K.
> When i choose in UEFI first time XMP profile i saved and booted fine to UEFI. I turn off pc,turn on again after 2 hours, and then, i met screen:
> THE SYSTEM HAS POSTED IN SAFE MODE. This happened just once. Now its booting fine,but i dont know why it booted just once with this message.
> This is screen from internet ,but the same msg:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My psu also is Corsair 750RM i
> I tried to reproduce this warning but i am not able to do that. Reverting to standard and then again to XMP save. Turn off pc by power button. But not warning. Any ideas why it happened just once,and still its something wrong?
> Memtest not showing errors.
> Worry about this?


erratic post failure (and repost in safemode) happens when the system is unstable. XMP will not necessarily provide foir a stable system (on any platform). You may need to set VSa and VCCIO manually. Remember, an OC on the ram is an OC on the CPU and the IMC. Even increased vcore may be necessary.


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> My MXH (wifi) VRM sensor is not showing up in HWINFO either. BIOS 1003.
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Bloot - Look! We both have Corsair H110i coolers. Yours must be an older one that still says H110i-GT. I have one of those in my X99 rig.


Yeah it's the old version.

About VRM temp sensor, it's weird because some people can monitor it and some other can't WITH THE EXACT SAME MOTHERBOARD









It would be really appreciated if someone at Asus could give us an explanation about it.

SIV shows an VRM10 sensor but no temperature on it


----------



## gammagoat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> It would be really appreciated if someone at Asus could give us an explanation about it.


Don't hold you breath on this one, I have checked daily on the ROG forums and the usual players wont even join the conversation on this.

I don't understand for such a standard sensor, how this isn't working from the gate.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> Don't hold you breath on this one, I have checked daily on the ROG forums and the usual players wont even join the conversation on this.
> 
> I don't understand for such a standard sensor, how this isn't working from the gate.


Usually when that happens I get a little worried.

It can simple be because they don't know yet and are investigating, or it can be due to some faulty motherboard that they don't want to admit / replace.

I'll wait a little bit and if they don't respond in like one or two week I'll open a warranty / support request saying that my MB is faulty for as it doesn't show VRM temperatures and see what they say.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Usually when that happens I get a little worried.
> 
> It can simple be because they don't know yet and are investigating, or it can be due to some faulty motherboard that they don't want to admit / replace.
> 
> I'll wait a little bit and if they don't respond in like one or two week *I'll open a warranty / support request saying that my MB is faulty for as it doesn't show VRM temperatures and see what they say.*


why not do that immediately?
...or it can be due to the software reading the senor.. or not reading it properly on a new platform. again, if you can see the VRM temp in Bios, the software is the issue. If you do not see it in bios, then either the sensor is not there, or ASUS has it disabled in that bios version. If you have never seen it in any bios on your board.. well, the most reasonable explanation is, it's not there.


----------



## l Nuke l

Finally decided to give adaptive voltage a shot and balanced mode in windows. Previously always ran a fixed manual voltage and high performance mode. Here is a screenshot of an x264 run. I noticed vid is higher than vcore, thought it was supposed to be the other way around? Anyway svid is set to best case, IA DC/AC Load Line set to 0.01, and adaptive vcore set to 1.365 and llc 5. Does everything look good?


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> why not do that immediately?
> ...or it can be due to the software reading the senor.. or not reading it properly on a new platform. again, if you can see the VRM temp in Bios, the software is the issue. If you do not see it in bios, then either the sensor is not there, or ASUS has it disabled in that bios version. If you have never seen it in any bios on your board.. well, the most reasonable explanation is, it's not there.


I just checked my Maximus X Hero Wifi BIOS 1003 and if I am looking in the right place (under Monitor), there is no VRM temp shown there. Others with the exact same board and exact same BIOS do see it. My BIOS was at all defaults when I grabbed this image. It should be right between Motherboard and PCH right?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> I just checked my Maximus X Hero Wifi BIOS 1003 and if I am looking in the right place (under Monitor), there is no VRM temp shown there. Others with the exact same board and exact same BIOS do see it. My BIOS was at all defaults when I grabbed this image. It should be right between Motherboard and PCH right?


That's exactly where it should show up but it doesn't on my MXF. HWinfo shows VRM temp through the EC bus but in order for AIDA64 to show VRM temp it needs to show up in the UEFI.


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Finally decided to give adaptive voltage a shot and balanced mode in windows. Previously always ran a fixed manual voltage and high performance mode. Here is a screenshot of an x264 run. I noticed vid is higher than vcore, thought it was supposed to be the other way around? Anyway svid is set to best case, IA DC/AC Load Line set to 0.01, and adaptive vcore set to 1.365 and llc 5. Does everything look good?


If you don't compensate your voltage with load-line calibration, your core voltage will droop with load. This is called Vdroop. It is natural. You can have the VRM compensate by increasing load-line calibration. It used to be that not enough Vdrrop could result in damage from transient spikes in voltage (from ringing on load changes). I do'n't know if this is still true or not.

The disadvantage of Vdroop without compensation is that you have to set your core voltage higher to make your OC stable at higher load. This means you have more volts than you need at lower.

I usually set load-line calibration at some intermediate value.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> That's exactly where it should show up but it doesn't on my MXF. HWinfo shows VRM temp through the EC bus but in order for AIDA64 to show VRM temp it needs to show up in the UEFI.


HWiNFO64 is not showing VRM temps on my rig either. So you are saying that AIDA and SIV require the sensor to be monitored in the UEFI BIOS but HWiNFO64 can monitor it through the EC bus? SIV can do that too. On my rig, it just is not there. Here is a snip of HWiNFO64 that I took today. It shows the Asus EC, but no VRM temp. So you are not seeing VRM temp in your BIOS but you are seeing it in HWiNFO?!?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> HWiNFO64 is not showing VRM temps on my rig either. So you are saying that AIDA and SIV require the sensor to be monitored in the UEFI BIOS but HWiNFO64 can monitor it through the EC bus? SIV can do that too. On my rig, it just is not there. Here is a snip of HWiNFO64 that I took today. It shows the Asus EC, but no VRM temp. So you are not seeing VRM temp in your BIOS but you are seeing it in HWiNFO?!?


According to AIDA64 forums VRM temp will not show unless it appears in monitor tab in the UEFI. Mine shows up with HWinfo but not in the UEFI or with AIDA64, never has with any of the UEFI's on my MXF but always did with my M8F.


----------



## bloot

So there's people with the exact same motherboard model who see vrm temp only on hwinfo through Asus EC, other people who see vrm temp on hwinfo and also on bios, and other people (me myself) who see vrm temp nowhere.

lol


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> According to AIDA64 forums VRM temp will not show unless it appears in monitor tab in the UEFI. Mine shows up with HWinfo but not in the UEFI or with AIDA64, never has with any of the UEFI's on my MXF but always did with my M8F.


Well I must say that I do not understand this at all. I will be watching this thread and the ROG thread about this. More MXH and MXH (wifi) owners are reporting they do NOT see the VRM sensor in BIOS or any monitoring software. I don't understand how it shows up for you in HWiNFO but not the BIOS. I checked SIV too. Same as the other pics posted. No sensor data.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> why not do that immediately?
> ...or it can be due to the software reading the senor.. or not reading it properly on a new platform. again, if you can see the VRM temp in Bios, the software is the issue. If you do not see it in bios, then either the sensor is not there, or ASUS has it disabled in that bios version. *If you have never seen it in any bios on your board.. well, the most reasonable explanation is, it's not there*.


That would only be true if that no user had seen the VRM on the UEFI for this motherboard, which is not the case at all.
If some X Hero show it on the UEFI and some not, it's most likely that it's an issue with the motherboard (maybe some that can be solved with Bios, maybe a hardware issue)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Finally decided to give adaptive voltage a shot and balanced mode in windows. Previously always ran a fixed manual voltage and high performance mode. Here is a screenshot of an x264 run. I noticed vid is higher than vcore, thought it was supposed to be the other way around? Anyway svid is set to best case, IA DC/AC Load Line set to 0.01, and adaptive vcore set to 1.365 and llc 5. Does everything look good?


looks fine to me. the 1.392 max vcore is most likely a low load thing. Voltage under high load should be lower than light or no load (adaptive + windows high perf mode for idle voltage). Nice job!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> I just checked my Maximus X Hero Wifi BIOS 1003 and if I am looking in the right place (under Monitor), there is no VRM temp shown there. *Others with the exact same board and exact same BIOS do see it.* My BIOS was at all defaults when I grabbed this image. It should be right between Motherboard and PCH right?


Frankly, I have no idea what's going on with this... but I also have not seen actual bios screen shots where VRM temp IS showing in bios and then not showing on the same gear elsewwhere. I read posts claiming this, but not yet seen the "data".

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> If you don't compensate your voltage with load-line calibration, your core voltage will droop with load. This is called Vdroop. It is natural. You can have the VRM compensate by increasing load-line calibration. It used to be that not enough Vdrrop could result in damage from transient spikes in voltage (from ringing on load changes). I do'n't know if this is still true or not.
> 
> The disadvantage of Vdroop without compensation is that you have to set your core voltage higher to make your OC stable at higher load. This means you have more volts than you need at lower.
> 
> *I usually set load-line calibration at some intermediate value*.


^^ this. A little droop is a good thing. And yes, transient load line overshoot still exists - modern VRMs dampen the oscillation better than old parts, but this is a "natural" event on any voltage-clamped circuit when current (at the clamped voltage) changes.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> That would only be true if that no user had seen the VRM on the UEFI for this motherboard, which is not the case at all.
> If some X Hero show it on the UEFI and some not, *it's most likely that it's an issue with the motherboard* (maybe some that can be solved with Bios, maybe a hardware issue)


or a bad bios version or bad bios flash for some reason. Yeah - if the identical SKU boards running the identical version bios show different, the one without the UEFI report may be broken. if it were just the DTS, I believe the bios field would not just default to "empty" but would not be listed.
if you think the board is broke, you really should RMA - contact ASus Support for your region.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> looks fine to me. the 1.392 max vcore is most likely a low load thing. Voltage under high load should be lower than light or no load (adaptive + windows high perf mode for idle voltage). Nice job!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Frankly, I have no idea what's going on with this... but I also have not seen actual bios screen shots where VRM temp IS showing in bios and then not showing on the same gear elsewwhere. I read posts claiming this, but not yet seen the "data".
> ^^ this. A little droop is a good thing. And yes, transient load line overshoot still exists - modern VRMs dampen the oscillation better than old parts, but this is a "natural" event on any voltage-clamped circuit when current (at the clamped voltage) changes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or a bad bios version or bad bios flash for some reason. Yeah - if the identical SKU boards running the identical version bios show different, the one without the UEFI report may be broken. if it were just the DTS, I believe the bios field would not just default to "empty" but would not be listed.
> if you think the board is broke, you really should RMA - contact ASus Support for your region.


As mentioned on MXF VRM does not show in UEFI 1003 or any of the other earlier UEFI's either but works with Hwinfo64 through EC bus but not in AIDA64 as mentioned in their forum thread
https://forums.aida64.com/topic/4031-asus-maximus-x-hero-missing-vrm-temp/


----------



## Scotty99

Is CPU package power reading in hwinfo relatively accurate? A 5ghz oc during WoW only had a max draw of 85w, thats pretty impressive considering a stock 1700 (65w cpu) gets to 51w.


----------



## sew333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> erratic post failure (and repost in safemode) happens when the system is unstable. XMP will not necessarily provide foir a stable system (on any platform). You may need to set VSa and VCCIO manually. Remember, an OC on the ram is an OC on the CPU and the IMC. Even increased vcore may be necessary.


I tried to reproduce this warning but i am not able to do that. Reverting to standard and then again to XMP save. Turn off pc by power button. But not warning. Any ideas why it happened just once,and still its something wrong?

This occured when pc was off some time , 4 hours . And then. I met users using XMP with the same issue , only after pc was off some time.

http://extreme.pcgameshardware.de/mainboards-und-arbeitsspeicher/474248-z170-pro-gaming-system-posted-safe-mode-schaltbare-steckdose.html

Memtest not showing errors also.

Really appreciate it for help. This is my new pc


----------



## sirtechalot

Hi, I have got a Strix-F paired with an 8700k. If I turn the pc on, a loud coil whine is coming from the board. I haven't installed windows yet. Is there a workaround for this or do I have to RMA / live with?

PS. I'm sorry but I can't search this thread because I am on iOS right now and the search button does not work







.


----------



## Menthol

Can you please either fill out the rig builder or list all your components to help with troubleshooting


----------



## sirtechalot

Asus z370 Strix-F
I7 8700K
Super Flower Leadex II Gold 650W
32 GB Corsair Dominator 3000 MHz
Asus GTX 1080 Strix Advanced
6x noiseblockers eloop 140mm
Adata 128 GB Gammix m.2
2TB Seagate FireCuda
Be Quiet Silent Loop 280mm
modded Phanteks Evolv ATX TG


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> As mentioned on MXF VRM does not show in UEFI 1003 or any of the other earlier UEFI's either but works with Hwinfo64 through EC bus but not in AIDA64 as mentioned in their forum thread
> https://forums.aida64.com/topic/4031-asus-maximus-x-hero-missing-vrm-temp/


^^ this ! +1
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sirtechalot*
> 
> Hi, I have got a Strix-F paired with an 8700k. If I turn the pc on, a loud coil whine is coming from the board. I haven't installed windows yet. Is there a workaround for this or do I have to RMA / live with?
> 
> PS. I'm sorry but I can't search this thread because I am on iOS right now and the search button does not work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


hard to tell. are you sure it;s the board, not the gpu or PSU?


----------



## SpeedyIV

A person on the ROG forum who said he did not see VRM sensor in his BIOS did the following and it showed up. I have asked him to post a BIOS screen shot of it being there. He did it with BIOS 0802. I tried this with BIOS 1003 for my Hero wifi. It did not make any difference. Still no VRM sensor in BIOS 1003.

_Go to Bios.
Load default, save and restart.
Go into bios again and flash it to your BIOS version (my Version is 0802)
When flash process is done Computer going restarting from self.
go to Bios and load Default Settings, save it and restart.
Now I have turn my PC off,
waited please for 10 seconds,
do Power cable out.
Now Press and hold for 5 seconds Bios Reset Button then release Button.
After that turn Power cable ON and start Computer.
Go to Bios and load Default Settings, save it and reboot.
Tadaaaaaa .... VRM sensor was there!
That's how it worked on my Maximus Hero X WiFi board!

because I'm sure this happens because of a dirty Bios Update Process.
Btw. sometimes it is flashed all correctly and sometimes it going wrong and you can not see your VRM Sensor!, he can simply not be read._


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> A person on the ROG forum who said he did not see VRM sensor in his BIOS did the following and it showed up. I have asked him to post a BIOS screen shot of it being there. He did it with BIOS 0802. I tried this with BIOS 1003 for my Hero wifi. It did not make any difference. Still no VRM sensor in BIOS 1003.
> 
> _Go to Bios.
> Load default, save and restart.
> Go into bios again and flash it to your BIOS version (my Version is 0802)
> When flash process is done Computer going restarting from self.
> go to Bios and load Default Settings, save it and restart.
> Now I have turn my PC off,
> waited please for 10 seconds,
> do Power cable out.
> Now Press and hold for 5 seconds Bios Reset Button then release Button.
> After that turn Power cable ON and start Computer.
> Go to Bios and load Default Settings, save it and reboot.
> Tadaaaaaa .... VRM sensor was there!
> That's how it worked on my Maximus Hero X WiFi board!
> 
> because I'm sure this happens because of a dirty Bios Update Process.
> Btw. sometimes it is flashed all correctly and sometimes it going wrong and you can not see your VRM Sensor!, he can simply not be read._


Tried it and it didn't work, neither with 1003 nor 0802 bios.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> Tried it and it didn't work, neither with 1003 nor 0802 bios.


doesn't surprise me that it does not work. Maybe gotta wait for Tuesdays and a full moon or something. reads more like an exorcism than rational


----------



## aramil

Another new Bios for the TUF Gaming Z370 plus
https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/TUF-Z370-PLUS-GAMING/HelpDesk_Download/

TUF Z370-PLUS GAMING BIOS 0610
1. Improve system stability


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> doesn't surprise me that it does not work. Maybe gotta wait for Tuesdays and a full moon or something. reads more like an exorcism than rational


Ya a lot of what he did after re-flashing seemed like voodoo to me but I could see where maybe a corrupt BIOS flash could result in the VRM temp not showing up (though it's a stretch). Someone else on the ROG thread said they went back and started looking at Hero BIOS screen shots in various reviews and You Tube videos and VRM temp is not shown in any of them, though none of the reviewers mention it. I have yet to see a post (besides the BIOS re-flash guy) that says it's there on an MXH. And his wasn't before he did the re-flash and whatever else after. I asked him to post a BIOS screen shot with the VRM sensor present but so far he hasn't. If present, it is reported through the ASUS EC so I don't understand how some say HWINFO reports it but it does not appear in the BIOS.

No comments from ASUS reps. RAJA has been posting over there but not in that thread, despite several PMs sent by various people (not me). I am debating if I care enough about this sensor to RMA the board. Maybe it's specific to a certain hardware revision. Hopefully someone will figure out what the deal is - VRM sensor present or not on Hero / Hero wifi, and if so how to get it to show up.

While reading about this issue, I stumbled into lots of posts about Hero boards having audio pops and crackles. Now I guess I need to also look into that. I haven't hooked up any speakers or other audio devices yet so I guess I better check ouf the audio functions of the board and confirm it all works. Kind of distracting from my over clocking progress.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Ya a lot of what he did after re-flashing seemed like voodoo to me but I could see where maybe a corrupt BIOS flash could result in the VRM temp not showing up (though it's a stretch). Someone else on the ROG thread said they went back and started looking at Hero BIOS screen shots in various reviews and You Tube videos and VRM temp is not shown in any of them, though none of the reviewers mention it. I have yet to see a post (besides the BIOS re-flash guy) that says it's there on an MXH. And his wasn't before he did the re-flash and whatever else after. I asked him to post a BIOS screen shot with the VRM sensor present but so far he hasn't. If present, it is reported through the ASUS EC so I don't understand how some say HWINFO reports it but it does not appear in the BIOS.
> 
> No comments from ASUS reps. RAJA has been posting over there but not in that thread, despite several PMs sent by various people (not me). I am debating if I care enough about this sensor to RMA the board. Maybe it's specific to a certain hardware revision. Hopefully someone will figure out what the deal is - VRM sensor present or not on Hero / Hero wifi, and if so how to get it to show up.
> 
> While reading about this issue, I stumbled into lots of posts about Hero boards having audio pops and crackles. Now I guess I need to also look into that. I haven't hooked up any speakers or other audio devices yet so I guess I better check ouf the audio functions of the board and confirm it all works. Kind of distracting from my over clocking progress.


yeah, I don't have he Hero... I think @Menthol does...


----------



## gammagoat

Is it possible to see this sensor if present, or is it buried in the VRM itself?

Anybody have a picture of what sensor looks like?

I'd be willing to take off heatsink and look for it(switching case soon anyway), but I have no Idea what to look for.


----------



## bud74

Hey guys! I am running 5ghz -2 avx @ 1.26vcore fixed & 1.248 in Windows with llc6 and cache at 46. Is it ok to leave cache pinned at 46 even when the cpu down clocks to 800mhz at idle? Should I set the min to 8 and the max to 46 in bios or leave as is? oh, board is MXH-wifi


----------



## Yetyhunter

Quick and direct question; If I update my BIOS for my strix E to the latest version will my saved profiles also be erased ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yetyhunter*
> 
> Quick and direct question; If I update my BIOS for my strix E to the latest version will my saved profiles also be erased ?


yes


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> Is it possible to see this sensor if present, or is it buried in the VRM itself?
> 
> Anybody have a picture of what sensor looks like?
> 
> I'd be willing to take off heatsink and look for it(switching case soon anyway), but I have no Idea what to look for.


Not to beat a dead horse, but I am really beginning to think that the Maximus X Hero does not have a VRM sensor, or at least that it does not show up in the BIOS of most boards. I did a Google search for reviews and looked for BIOS screen shots. Legit Reviews, Pro Clockers, GURU 3D, back2back gaming - they all have BIOS screen shots that include the Monitor tab and none of them show the VRM sensor. Note - all of these reviews are of the Maximus X Hero but I assume the wifi version is the same in this regard. The review dates vary from late September 2017 to early November 2017 so these are all pre BIOS 1003 - probably 0802.

GURU 3D http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/asus-rog-maximus-x-hero-review,6.html


Legit Reviews http://www.legitreviews.com/asus-rog-maximus-x-hero-z370-motherboard-review_199303/3


Pro Clockers https://proclockers.com/reviews/motherboards/asus-rog-maximus-x-hero-motherboard-review/page/0/4


back2back gaming https://www.back2gaming.com/reviews/b2g-hardware/hw-components/cpu-mobo/asus-rog-maximus-x-hero-motherboard-review/3/


----------



## aliquiswe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I have a set of 3466 Red LED not RGB, XMP never worked on Z270 board, 3200mhz was difficult to get stable (they run great at 2133 default), last Corsair kit I have purchased
> 
> A Gskill b-die kit will cure your ill's and make life enjoyable again


Too late for that but would suck if a 200-300 SEK (10-15% more expensive) TridentZ kit would had worked better.


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Yep


Yep marketing! While the Code does appear to have a VRM temperature sensor (It shows in HWInfo64), it shows nowhere in th bios. In particular it is not available as a source in fanxpert4 like the marketing implies.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Not to beat a dead horse, but I am really beginning to think that the Maximus X Hero does not have a VRM sensor, or at least that it does not show up in the BIOS of most boards. I did a Google search for reviews and looked for BIOS screen shots. Legit Reviews, Pro Clockers, GURU 3D, back2back gaming - they all have BIOS screen shots that include the Monitor tab and none of them show the VRM sensor. Note - all of these reviews are of the Maximus X Hero but I assume the wifi version is the same in this regard. The review dates vary from late September 2017 to early November 2017 so these are all pre BIOS 1003 - probably 0802.


The Hero X-files
Is it possible there is alien microcode in the Hero bios? Maybe just some boards manufactured on a specific date?
Will Hero owners be the chosen ones when Aliens take over our planet, and if so chosen for what purpose?
Maybe if you play the X-files music in the background when you flash your bios VRM temps will magically appear, then you are the chosen one, maybe you need to repeat Mulder's name during a bios flash?

My Hero Wifi never showed a VRM temp, from original bios to latest and although I didn't try any odd combinations of flash procedure I don't think that will make a difference unless it tricks the alien microcode.
I have heard some sound clicking, popping, I uninstalled all realtek drivers and ASUS software and installed latest Realtek drivers through device manager without and sound management software and don't hear these noises any longer, is it the alien microcode, I don't know but I am pretty sure that Hero owners are the chosen ones


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> The Hero X-files
> Is it possible there is alien microcode in the Hero bios? Maybe just some boards manufactured on a specific date?
> Will Hero owners be the chosen ones when Aliens take over our planet, and if so chosen for what purpose?
> Maybe if you play the X-files music in the background when you flash your bios VRM temps will magically appear, then you are the chosen one, maybe you need to repeat Mulder's name during a bios flash?
> 
> My Hero Wifi never showed a VRM temp, from original bios to latest and although I didn't try any odd combinations of flash procedure I don't think that will make a difference unless it tricks the alien microcode.
> I have heard some sound clicking, popping, I uninstalled all realtek drivers and ASUS software and installed latest Realtek drivers through device manager without and sound management software and don't hear these noises any longer, is it the alien microcode, I don't know but I am pretty sure that Hero owners are the chosen ones


Makes perfect sense. I guess I have been chosen, by planet ASUS, in the Z370 system - to not be able to monitor my VRM temps.


----------



## Jpmboy

@Menthol

^^ Post of the month!

Before the site goes down for 18h.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Makes perfect sense. I guess I have been chosen, by planet ASUS, in the Z370 system - to not be able to monitor my VRM temps.


Maybe the VRM are monitoring your temps, be a Hero give in, to resist is futile


----------



## osvld

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sew333*
> 
> I tried to reproduce this warning but i am not able to do that. Reverting to standard and then again to XMP save. Turn off pc by power button. But not warning. Any ideas why it happened just once,and still its something wrong?
> 
> This occured when pc was off some time , 4 hours . And then. I met users using XMP with the same issue , only after pc was off some time.
> 
> http://extreme.pcgameshardware.de/mainboards-und-arbeitsspeicher/474248-z170-pro-gaming-system-posted-safe-mode-schaltbare-steckdose.html
> 
> Memtest not showing errors also.
> 
> Really appreciate it for help. This is my new pc


Get the same problem with new build. I use only XMP profile.


----------



## Yetyhunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes


So the only way to re-enter those perfect settings after the BIOS update is to take pictures of them before the update ? I remember that Asrock boards kept those saved profiles ready to be reloaded after BIOS flash.


----------



## DStealth

I lost my profiles on Hero from 0802 to 1003 update. Even saved on USB stick profile doesn't work...those aliens








Just be aware

No VRM sensor here either


----------



## bloot

Raiders of the lost vrm sensor lol


----------



## DStealth

I don't care about it actually, but just checked in BIOS and it's not present there with both versions 0802 & 1003 for my Hero (non-WiFi) board


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yetyhunter*
> 
> So the only way to re-enter those perfect settings after the BIOS update is to take pictures of them before the update ? I remember that Asrock boards kept those saved profiles ready to be reloaded after BIOS flash.


bios files are not portable between bios versions. put a usb stick in any port, on the asus profiles page nav to the stick, and hit ctrl-F2. it will save a txt file.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I lost my profiles on Hero from 0802 to 1003 update. Even saved on USB stick profile doesn't work...those aliens
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just be aware
> 
> No VRM sensor here either


not sure why folks think cmo files should work between bios versions.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not sure why folks think cmo files should work between bios versions.


On AsRock, at least on Z77 gen, they worked. Even if some configuration changed I image the load profile would check the settings and apply only what was still valid - that's not hard to do on a programming level, really hard to believe Asus can't do it specially on ROG products...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> On AsRock, at least on Z77 gen, they worked. Even if some configuration changed I image the load profile would check the settings and apply only what was still valid - that's not hard to do on a programming level, really hard to believe Asus can't do it specially on ROG products...


i'm gonna guess that too many users borked systems cause, unlike you, they normally do not check what's valid, new, or ranged differently. Have to do this at the lowest common denominator unfortunately.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> i'm gonna guess that too many users borked systems cause, unlike you, they normally do not check what's valid, new, or ranged differently. Have to do this at the lowest common denominator unfortunately.


No I didn't checked either. I was trying to say that probably the AsRock "load profile" feature worked with any saved profile because it checked if each settings saved was still valid and applied only the ones that were valid.

As a developer myself I can say this is not hard to do on a programming level.

The profile is probably just a JSON with settings linked to IDs so the "load and apply profile" function probably compare the bio's ID's and the saved profile settings ID's and populate each matching them.

Then to make it work with old profiles you basically need to save the bios version on some flag on the profile, and on each bios released, if any setting changed in a way that can't load a settings from an old profile this would simple be a flag on that particular setting that will make the "load and apply profile" function ignore it and apply everything else (and to be really nice also list what could not be loaded to the user at the end).

After all I imagine that 99% of the time there is no significant changes on settings properties / range between bios that would make it not work with old values.


----------



## outofmyheadyo

Same here no VRM sensor on my Hero X








Seriously what is ASUS doing ? Asking such premium for their boards yet they cant add a simple thing like VRM sensor ? Come on, make an effort.
Starting to regret picking it over the Taichi, only reason I did didnt want to wait for a week for the Taichi, it doesnt even have WIFI or BT...


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *outofmyheadyo*
> 
> Same here no VRM sensor on my Hero X
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously what is ASUS doing ? Asking such premium for their boards yet they cant add a simple thing like VRM sensor ? Come on, make an effort.
> Starting to regret picking it over the Taichi, only reason I did didnt want to wait for a week for the Taichi, it doesnt even have WIFI or BT...


I asked about this issue on the HWINFO and AIDA forums. Both of the authors of these programs responded that there is more than 1 version of the Maximus X Hero boards. Asus changed a PWM controller chip in the VRM section and the alternate component does not report VRM temp. I suspect that realizing this, Asus removed the VRM temp from the BIOS - maybe from 0802 forward, possibly earlier.

Those who are seeing the VRM temp in HWINFO in the EC section must have the older version of the PWM controller chip. That is why they see VRM temp in HWiNFO, reported via EC, but not in the BIOS or in AIDA, which does not monitor the EC bus. I am not sure if they would accept the absence of this sensor as grounds for an RMA, and the replacement board would likely not have it anyway. Maybe since VRM temps are not a great concern with Z370, they didn't think it was a big deal. Since it seems that no one from Asus will comment on this mysterious vanishing sensor, we may never know. The specs on the MOBO never actually say there is a VRM temp sensor, but they sure make it look like there is in the pretty pictures. Fool me once Asus...


----------



## gammagoat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *outofmyheadyo*
> 
> Same here no VRM sensor on my Hero X
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously what is ASUS doing ? Asking such premium for their boards yet they cant add a simple thing like VRM sensor ? Come on, make an effort.
> Starting to regret picking it over the Taichi, only reason I did didnt want to wait for a week for the Taichi, it doesnt even have WIFI or BT...


I bought mine(my first higher end board) thinking I'd finally see what all the fuss was about. I'm disappointed.

Thinking of selling this board and buying the Taichi.

I would have just stepped up to the Apex, but I feel deceived.

Damn for $40.00 more you would think they could at least as you said add a vrm sensor.

Good bye Asus.

Edit: What would be a fair price to ask for this board, considering that the IO Rgb is broken also.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> I bought mine(my first higher end board) thinking I'd finally see what all the fuss was about. I'm disappointed.
> Thinking of selling this board and buying the Taichi.
> I would have just stepped up to the Apex, but I feel deceived.
> Damn for $40.00 more you would think they could at least as you said add a vrm sensor.
> Good bye Asus.
> Edit: What would be a *fair price to ask for this board*, considering that the IO Rgb is broken also.


free... it's got physical damage (IO RGB)








(yeah - you shoulda got the Apex)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> No I didn't checked either. I was trying to say that probably the AsRock "load profile" feature worked with any saved profile because it checked if each settings saved was still valid and applied only the ones that were valid.
> 
> As a developer myself I can say this is not hard to do on a programming level.
> 
> The profile is probably just a JSON with settings linked to IDs so the "load and apply profile" function probably compare the bio's ID's and the saved profile settings ID's and populate each matching them.
> 
> Then to make it work with old profiles you basically need to save the bios version on some flag on the profile, and on each bios released, if any setting changed in a way that can't load a settings from an old profile this would simple be a flag on that particular setting that will make the "load and apply profile" function ignore it and apply everything else (and to be really nice also list what could not be loaded to the user at the end).
> 
> After all I imagine that 99% of the time there is no significant changes on settings properties / range between bios that would make it not work with old values.


it's not a matter of whether it can be done (yes, I have/had several Asrock boards) it's a risk/reward/effort analysis thing I'd bet. Can't recall if my asrock MOCF would load old version bios files. Never tried.


----------



## gammagoat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> free... it's got physical damage (IO RGB)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (yeah - you shoulda got the Apex)


Funny for the 90.00 vrm sensor, I just ordered Taichi.

From what I understand Taichi OC ram very well.

Hope I can get 180.00 - 200.00 for the Hero.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> Funny for the 90.00 vrm sensor, I just ordered Taichi.
> 
> From what I understand Taichi OC ram very well.
> 
> Hope I can get 180.00 - 200.00 for the Hero.


enjoy!


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> I bought mine(my first higher end board) thinking I'd finally see what all the fuss was about. I'm disappointed.
> 
> Thinking of selling this board and buying the Taichi.
> 
> I would have just stepped up to the Apex, but I feel deceived.
> 
> Damn for $40.00 more you would think they could at least as you said add a vrm sensor.
> 
> Good bye Asus.
> 
> Edit: What would be a fair price to ask for this board, considering that the IO Rgb is broken also.


It's not that they did not provide a VRM temp sensor. Apparently, they did. Then quietly removed it. And the Asus rep who frequents this forum and the ROG forum (where there is a 5 page thread about this), has made no comment. The lack of response suggests that they are aware of this situation and do not want to admit that the VRM temp sensor was there (as advertised) and then removed.I share your feeling of being deceived. Again, Fool me once, Asus. If I am wrong, please explain it. I am all ears...


----------



## gammagoat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> enjoy!


Thanks, planning to.

Hope my case wont look like a airport runway at night now.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> It's not that they did not provide a VRM temp sensor. Apparently, they did. Then quietly removed it. And the Asus rep who frequents this forum and the ROG forum (where there is a 5 page thread about this), has made no comment. The lack of response suggests that they are aware of this situation and do not want to admit that the VRM temp sensor was there (as advertised) and then removed.I share your feeling of being deceived. Again, Fool me once, Asus. If I am wrong, please explain it. I am all ears...


Yep, its the lack of any response by Asus, that has me looking elsewhere.

I was ready to buy the Apex, I have the disposable income to "waste".

But with the lack of response from Asus on this I'll just move along.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> free... it's got physical damage (IO RGB)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (yeah - you shoulda got the Apex)


I learnt that one quickly, best board I've owned


----------



## KedarWolf

Anyone else not getting email notifications to threads they are subscribed to?

Edit: Had to enable notifications in overclock.net settings even though I had them enabled for each thread.


----------



## KedarWolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> enjoy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, planning to.
> 
> Hope my case wont look like a airport runway at night now.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> It's not that they did not provide a VRM temp sensor. Apparently, they did. Then quietly removed it. And the Asus rep who frequents this forum and the ROG forum (where there is a 5 page thread about this), has made no comment. The lack of response suggests that they are aware of this situation and do not want to admit that the VRM temp sensor was there (as advertised) and then removed.I share your feeling of being deceived. Again, Fool me once, Asus. If I am wrong, please explain it. I am all ears...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yep, its the lack of any response by Asus, that has me looking elsewhere.
> 
> I was ready to buy the Apex, I have the disposable income to "waste".
> 
> But with the lack of response from Asus on this I'll just move along.
Click to expand...

Or get the Code or Formula.

They have a VRM sensor but I can only see it on my MXF in HWInfo, not even in the BIOS.


----------



## Jpmboy

eh, on x299 vrm temp is something you want to pay attention to, even scale the vrm fan with vrm temp... z370, it just does not have that much work to do and runs quite cool ~ 40C or so at max.


----------



## gammagoat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> eh, on x299 vrm temp is something you want to pay attention to, even scale the vrm fan with vrm temp... z370, it just does not have that much work to do and runs quite cool ~ 40C or so at max.


You have the Apex right?

The thing is I have seen many reviews of the Hero X showing vrm temp much higher than 40c.

I could live with this board if I could only verify, even if just once without having to buy a Infrared Thermometer.

Is there a place that I could attach a thermistor and get a somewhat decent idea of what temps may be?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> You have the Apex right?
> 
> The thing is I have seen many reviews of the Hero X showing vrm temp much higher than 40c.
> 
> I could live with this board if I could only verify, even if just once without having to buy a Infrared Thermometer.
> 
> Is there a place that I could attach a thermistor and get a somewhat decent idea of what temps may be?


you'd really have to pull the heatsink - it's just not worth it bro, the z370 VRMs are way more than we're gonna heat up. their AOR is up to 105C. You'd smell the dmn things well before that.







(and I have "_smelled that smell_" - RVZ)
Enjoy the rig. Unless you are running 5.6GHz at 1.5V or something you really have nothing to worry about. Yes, I have the APEX.


----------



## gammagoat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you'd really have to pull the heatsink - it's just not worth it bro, the z370 VRMs are way more than we're gonna heat up. their AOR is up to 105C. You'd smell the dmn things well before that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (and I have "_smelled that smell_" - RVZ)
> Enjoy the rig. Unless you are running 5.6GHz at 1.5V or something you really have nothing to worry about. Yes, I have the APEX.


Thanks.

I've canceled my order for Taichi, looks like I'd be giving up even more monitoring capabilities i.e water temps.

CPU is going under water soon, currently leak testing.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I've canceled my order for Taichi, looks like I'd be giving up even more monitoring capabilities i.e water temps.
> 
> CPU is going under water soon, currently leak testing.


afaik, the Hero has water in/out headers.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I've canceled my order for Taichi, looks like I'd be giving up even more monitoring capabilities i.e water temps.
> 
> CPU is going under water soon, currently leak testing.


Just be aware that water temperature may not be measurable either at least not with AIDA64, I can confirm that sensor T1 will be measurable which is where I plugged in my water temperature sensor







When Asus have a total of 3 T sensors only the T1 sensor is monitor-able with software the other 2 can be monitored but only through the UEFI, I suspect water in and out T sensors are actually relabelled T2 and T3 hence why I used T1.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> eh, on x299 vrm temp is something you want to pay attention to, even scale the vrm fan with vrm temp... z370, it just does not have that much work to do and runs quite cool ~ 40C or so at max.


I guess I will have to take your word for it, since I can't monitor it









Yep. Should a bought the Apex.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you'd really have to pull the heatsink - it's just not worth it bro, the z370 VRMs are way more than we're gonna heat up. their AOR is up to 105C. You'd smell the dmn things well before that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (and I have "_smelled that smell_" - RVZ)
> Enjoy the rig. Unless you are running 5.6GHz at 1.5V or something you really have nothing to worry about. Yes, I have the APEX.


I was also thinking about just putting a thermal probe right on the heat sink. That should at least be as accurate as an IR Thermometer right? Maybe I can sneak a probe up under the heat sink. It's better than nothing (which is what ASUS has evidently decided to provide). Got nothing to lose.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Just be aware that water temperature may not be measurable either at least not with AIDA64, I can confirm that sensor T1 will be measurable which is where I plugged in my water temperature sensor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When Asus have a total of 3 T sensors only the T1 sensor is monitor-able with software the other 2 can be monitored but only through the UEFI, I suspect water in and out T sensors are actually relabelled T2 and T3 hence why I used T1.


HWiNFO64 (latest beta) picks up water in/out temp on my apex X... tho I just use the in header now.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> I was also thinking about just putting a *thermal probe right on the heat sink*. That should at least be as accurate as an IR Thermometer right? Maybe I can sneak a probe up under the heat sink. It's better than nothing (which is what ASUS has evidently decided to provide). Got nothing to lose.


Absolutely, would be the same surface temp as an IRT. Just stick one of the thermocouples right on it (or slip one under). I squeeze one between the ram ICs and ram HS on my R5E10 and R6A... especially the R5E10 since it is packed with 8 ram sticks and they can get warm since ther is zero air flow between them.


----------



## l Nuke l

Does anyone know if it is possible to short a motherboard when using a multimeter to read the probeit voltage points? As long as one doesnt stick the probes anywherre other tthan that area one should be fine right?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Nevermind duh moment again...

I've been able to dial in Adaptive voltages finally.
LLC 5, Additional turbo voltage 1.330v ends up giving me 1.310v for non AVX and 1.376v under heavy AVX loads loads which is what I was aiming for because I know I need that voltage to be AVX stable.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Does anyone know if it is possible to short a motherboard when using a multimeter to read the probeit voltage points? As long as one doesnt stick the probes anywherre other tthan that area one should be fine right?


well.. anything is possible... Egon: "Don't cross the streams"


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> well.. anything is possible... Egon: "Don't cross the streams"


lol! Just to clarify, you mean dont let the red and black probes touch each other when probing the mobo right?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> lol! Just to clarify, you mean dont let the red and black probes touch each other when probing the mobo right?


yes!


----------



## Rowethren

Yeah at over 100amps at load connecting them would make quite a bang I imagine...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rowethren*
> 
> Yeah at over 100amps at load connecting them would make quite a bang I imagine...


Huh? using the on-board read points (probit belt) it is _not quite_ direct access to the PSU single rail peak current.


----------



## DStealth

How is this ?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Has anyone noticed a change in ram stability between the current 1003 BIOS the previous 0901.
What was stable under 0901 isn't under 1003.

Not to save my ram is the best, far from it, just found it odd.

I haven't noticed any problems until I tried to play Life is Strange: Before the storm, within 5 minutes had a blue screen "Memory Management error", same with OCCT.
I had to set the ram back to default XMP timings to get i stable.


----------



## DStealth

I had ram issues also on the newest Hero BIOS that's why reverted and all is fine now as it should. You can try to flash the previous BIOS for your board and test the similar situation you're facing these instabilities.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I had ram issues also on the newest Hero BIOS that's why reverted and all is fine now as it should. You can try to flash the previous BIOS for your board and test the similar situation you're facing these instabilities.


I only just updated to 1003 again last night, on 0901 my ram settings passed every ram test, today BSOD, heck OCCT would blue screen and not quack on like usual on 1003.


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Has anyone noticed a change in ram stability between the current 1003 BIOS the previous 0901.
> What was stable under 0901 isn't under 1003.
> 
> Not to save my ram is the best, far from it, just found it odd.
> 
> I haven't noticed any problems until I tried to play Life is Strange: Before the storm, within 5 minutes had a blue screen "Memory Management error", same with OCCT.
> I had to set the ram back to default XMP timings to get i stable.


Yes absolutely, 0802 was way better


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Has anyone noticed a change in ram stability between the current 1003 BIOS the previous 0901.
> What was stable under 0901 isn't under 1003.
> 
> Not to save my ram is the best, far from it, just found it odd.
> 
> I haven't noticed any problems until I tried to play Life is Strange: Before the storm, within 5 minutes had a blue screen "Memory Management error", same with OCCT.
> I had to set the ram back to default XMP timings to get i stable.


which mobo?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> lol! Just to clarify, you mean dont let the red and black probes touch each other when probing the mobo right?


Good job in Rookie Rumble!


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Good job in Rookie Rumble!


thanks dude!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> thanks dude!


if you are on the OCN team. open your OCN Community Profile and add your bot username to the HWBOT field. The HWBOT icon will be added.


----------



## fleps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> these chips are very sensitive to temperature. I just ran hyp Pi 32M at 1.38V (5.2 = ~130W power) and the peak temp on any core is below 60C.. however, the Ram temperature is getting up there. I removed the ram fan for this test - it's an open bench. So, yes, that cpu is running hot.. I'd bet the delid has fouled somehow. Second, ram may be having thermal errors. redo the delid mount th ecooler with a good paste (TGK, Gelid, PK) and put a fan on the ram... cpu may be better than you think. On the other hand, nothing wrong with trying another cpu.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fleps*
> 
> Yeah I may try to re-delid. Did you closed your HIS with super glue gel or silicon?
> The thermal is good, I'm using thermal grizzly conductonaut.


Hey guys.

So just to give an update, today I finally changed a few things around and want to share my experience because it may help others. Also, spoiler alert, *my load temps dropped by ~10-12 C*.

- When removing the CPU I noted the liquid metal between the AIO block and the IHS was not very uniform.
- Also noted that the screws and the backplate from EVGA CLC don't stay tight on their own when the block is not there. You screw them till the max and things are still very loose and then at some point the block upper screws will also reach the limit. I found this odd and it seems the motherboard is more thin than the screws were expecting.
- The IHS was not correctly glued on the chip. I used super glue gel on the first relid and I probably put too little in 2 corners and it didn't hold. I don't think this is an issue as the IHS will be keep in place with the block pressure anyway.
- I also did some research about air flow because on big cases like the TT core x71 things can get more complicated.

So what I did was:

- re-delided the CPU. I used polish compound to remove the existent LM (liquid metal) from the block and IHS external / internal. The LM on the chip itself was good so I just spread it evenly and applied a little more on the internal IHS. This time I used more super glue on the corners and after 3h everything was pretty tight.
- added some washes between the AIO backplate and the motherboard so it won't cross the MB so much and now the block seems pretty tight on the CPU
- I moved the radiator from the top (intake) to the front (also intake)
- I have a rear AF 140 fan as exhaust and now another AF 140 right on the top aligned with CPU block also as exhaust.
- I added a good 92mm (at 2200 rpm on load) fan right on the side of the motherboard / ram sticks, blowing air on the RAM an every circuit there, towards the rear exhaust fan.

*Config*
8700k @ 5Ghz -2 AVX 1.39 vcore (LLC6)
DR4 3200 @ 3400 Mhz CL16 1.4v
Ambient temps: 28 ~30 C

*Results Before*
HyperPI 32M - peak of 85 C
Realbench - after ~20 min it would peak 90C with AIO fans at 80% (pretty loud) and then I stopped.

*Results now*
HyperPI 32M - peak of 75 C
Realbench - 1h run max peak of 77 C with AIO fans mostly on 40%, peaks of 60% when above 75C.

All started as an attempt to re-delid, but after all I don't think my delid was the problem because internally the LM between the chip and the IHS was good. IMO it was a combination of AIO block with not enough pressure on the CPU, too much intake with the rad on the top (and I have a 980 TI non-blower) and the not enough air flow to push the hot air from the OC ram and circuits to the rear as it's a big case.

So now seems pretty good to me =)


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if you are on the OCN team. open your OCN Community Profile and add your bot username to the HWBOT field. The HWBOT icon will be added.


Done. Jist waiting mods approval.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> which mobo?


Apex man









Ram kit: CMK32GX4M4B3200C16, well it's 16GB's of the 32GB kit..


----------



## l Nuke l

When using a fixed vcore is it better to disable cpu svid? or leave it on auto?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Apex man
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ram kit: CMK32GX4M4B3200C16, well it's 16GB's of the 32GB kit..


ah.. hynix. mode 1 or mode 2 for the ram? (try mode 1)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> When using a fixed vcore is it better to disable cpu svid? or leave it on auto?


disable it... or Auto. Frankly, when you select manual override (fixed vcore) the VID is just ignored.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ah.. hynix. mode 1 or mode 2 for the ram? (try mode 1)


Tried both, mode 1 BSOD, mode 2 fine.
If I stray from the XMP defaults it's a BSOD on the 1003, go back to 0901 and it's fine.

I'm putting it down to the fact the ram modules are Hynix and the Apex like's b-dies better, well that and the recent microcode updates.








I can get a 16GB 3200Mhz Flare-X kit (F4-3200C14D-16GFX) for $300, they are Samsung B-Dies, might look at grabbing them

Still stuck with a sucky overclocker though.
[email protected] just to pass OCCT large data set, more if I want to pass small data set.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Tried both, mode 1 BSOD, mode 2 fine.
> If I stray from the XMP defaults it's a BSOD on the 1003, go back to 0901 and it's fine.
> 
> I'm putting it down to the fact the ram modules are Hynix and the Apex like's b-dies better, well that and the recent microcode updates.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can get a 16GB 3200Mhz Flare-X kit (F4-3200C14D-16GFX) for $300, they are Samsung B-Dies, might look at grabbing them
> 
> Still stuck with a sucky overclocker though.
> [email protected] just to pass OCCT large data set, more if I want to pass small data set.


imo, stick with 0901. I am suprised that the bios update affected ram stability tho. Luckily I have not seen that (yet) on the rigs here, tho x99 and x79 have yet to be patched up (only the MS patch is on those.


----------



## Scotty99

So im trying to dial in a low voltage 4.8ghz overclock and for the life of me cannot figure out how to get adaptive working correctly. No matter what i set in the bios svid is taking over and is setting my chip to 1.312-1.328. IA AC/DC loadline is set to .01 and ive tried every combination of loadline and even tried doing a negative offset in tandem with the adaptive voltage i enter.

What i want to happen is a max Vcore of 1.265 (what my chip needs for 4.8, did the tests with manual volts) but i just cannot get it that low lol.

For example i can enter 1.1v in the bios and vid will still be 1.310, why is this still happening with IA loadlines set to .01?


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So im trying to dial in a low voltage 4.8ghz overclock and for the life of me cannot figure out how to get adaptive working correctly. No matter what i set in the bios svid is taking over and is setting my chip to 1.312-1.328. IA AC/DC loadline is set to .01 and ive tried every combination of loadline and even tried doing a negative offset in tandem with the adaptive voltage i enter.
> 
> What i want to happen is a max Vcore of 1.265 (what my chip needs for 4.8, did the tests with manual volts) but i just cannot get it that low lol.
> 
> For example i can enter 1.1v in the bios and vid will still be 1.310, why is this still happening with IA loadlines set to .01?


Set svid behavior to best case and make sure windows is in balanced mode. After you boot into windows give it at least 3 minutes for the idle voltages to drop.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So im trying to dial in a low voltage 4.8ghz overclock and for the life of me cannot figure out how to get adaptive working correctly. No matter what i set in the bios svid is taking over and is setting my chip to 1.312-1.328. IA AC/DC loadline is set to .01 and ive tried every combination of loadline and even tried doing a negative offset in tandem with the adaptive voltage i enter.
> 
> What i want to happen is a max Vcore of 1.265 (what my chip needs for 4.8, did the tests with manual volts) but i just cannot get it that low lol.
> 
> For example i can enter 1.1v in the bios and vid will still be 1.310, why is this still happening with IA loadlines set to .01?


Set up adaptive like this and as mentioned use best case scenario


----------



## Scotty99

Thats exactly how i have my adaptive setup (but with 1.265 punched in, and llc6). Never heard of the svid behavior, ill give that a shot.

Nope, still 1.312-1.328. Of course it will come down to .656 or whatever at idle and load volts are what i want them to be, but what im trying to do is get rid of the voltage spikes to 1.3+. Is there not a way to achieve this?


----------



## Essenbe

Disable SVID and try it.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Essenbe*
> 
> Disable SVID and try it.


I thought you needed svid for adaptive to work? Guess ill give it a shot lol.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I thought you needed svid for adaptive to work? Guess ill give it a shot lol.


you do. Did u try what i said? Make sure u let it sit in windows for few minutes to let the voltages drop and that your not using high performance mode


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> you do. Did u try what i said? Make sure u let it sit in windows for few minutes to let the voltages drop and that your not using high performance mode


Yes i tried the best case setting, nothing changed. Again my idle volts are fine (.624) and my load volts are where i want them with llc enabled, but i want to get rid of the spikes to 1.3-1.328 while its just randomly doing things like loading up windows or even gaming, these spikes (which i have no idea why they are happening) are causing random high temp spikes for me. Why is my board asking for 1.3+v when i set 1.265v in adaptive field, have ia loadline set to .01, and select best case scenario in svid behavior.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yes i tried the best case setting, nothing changed. Again my idle volts are fine (.624) and my load volts are where i want them with llc enabled, but i want to get rid of the spikes to 1.3-1.328 while its just randomly doing things like loading up windows or even gaming, these spikes (which i have no idea why they are happening) are causing random high temp spikes for me. Why is my board asking for 1.3+v when i set 1.265v in adaptive field, have ia loadline set to .01, and select best case scenario in svid behavior.


thats normal dude. If i set mine to 1.365 adaptive i get spikes up to 1.38-1.392. Llc 5.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> thats normal dude. If i set mine to 1.365 adaptive i get spikes up to 1.38-1.392. Llc 5.


Hmm not an experience i had with sandy bridge, what i set in the bios with offset is the MAX i would see in windows, same on my ryzen PC.

I cant believe this is normal behavior. During gaming it actually loads at higher volts than if i have a stress test running, and temps are higher than they need to be (if i set manual volts, i get lower gaming temps).

When i say i get higher volts while gaming of course it does not stay there, im talking about the spikes.


----------



## Scotty99

Think i may give asrock a shot, im 99% sure if i set the offset to where i want it to load in windows, it will never exceed that value. Think asus may have a broken version of adaptive/offset.


----------



## DStealth

But why the hell on earth anyone overclock using adaptive or whatever Auto voltage for the CPU ?!?


----------



## Essenbe

I don't claim to be an expert but, as I understand it, SVID enables the CPU to request whatever voltage it wants from the VRM and will therefore spike voltages at times and override whatever your settings are. With it disabled, it will rely on your settings. I don't use adaptive, I use Offset with some OCs and Manual with higher ones. But, that setting caused me to have spikes with both of those settings. Disabled, I run very close to what I set in bios.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> But why the hell on earth anyone overclock using adaptive or whatever Auto voltage for the CPU ?!?


When adaptive is not broken which on early UEFI it usually is what is wrong with overclocking with adaptive?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> But why the hell on earth anyone overclock using adaptive or whatever Auto voltage for the CPU ?!?


I feel the opposite lol. I think manual volts are a caveman way of doing things and is not how CPU's work at stock, also every overclocking program worth a lick uses offset voltages.

I know high idle voltages are not damaging nor do they cause much more power draw at idle, just seems wrong to have higher idle volts than load volts to me.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I feel the opposite lol. I think manual volts are a caveman way of doing things and is not how CPU's work at stock, also every overclocking program worth a lick uses offset voltages.
> 
> I know high idle voltages are not damaging nor do they cause much more power draw at idle, just seems wrong to have higher idle volts than load volts to me.


The way I do it is to use manual volts to determine stable overclock then switch to adaptive for 24/7 use, keeps idle temperatures down a bit especially in summer here where my room temp reaches 33 degrees C on a hot 44 degrees C day


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So im trying to dial in a low voltage 4.8ghz overclock and for the life of me cannot figure out how to get adaptive working correctly. No matter what i set in the bios svid is taking over and is setting my chip to 1.312-1.328. IA AC/DC loadline is set to .01 and ive tried every combination of loadline and even tried doing a negative offset in tandem with the adaptive voltage i enter.
> 
> What i want to happen is a max Vcore of 1.265 (what my chip needs for 4.8, did the tests with manual volts) but i just cannot get it that low lol.
> 
> For example i can enter 1.1v in the bios and vid will still be 1.310, why is this still happening with IA loadlines set to .01?


same thing here.


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Essenbe*
> 
> I don't claim to be an expert but, as I understand it, SVID enables the CPU to request whatever voltage it wants from the VRM and will therefore spike voltages at times and override whatever your settings are. With it disabled, it will rely on your settings. I don't use adaptive, I use Offset with some OCs and Manual with higher ones. But, that setting caused me to have spikes with both of those settings. Disabled, I run very close to what I set in bios.


What he is talking about isn't spokes, but the maximum voltage on the loadline, No matter how much he lowers the additional turbo voltage, the voltage under load doesn't change. I have the same issue.

Normally you can't lower the voltage below what Intel thinks the turbo voltage should be, but we are supposed to be able to get around that.
The only thing I could do to lower that voltage is lowering LLC, but that is very coarse. I need to play with LLC and additional turbo o get a lower voltage, but I don;t have much hope there.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> ...manual volts are a caveman way ...


Yea sure, non-caveman(a.k.a advanced users) arguing anywhere for issues and incompatibilities...


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Yea sure, non-caveman(a.k.a advanced users) arguing anywhere for issues and incompatibilities...


It wasnt meant as an insult, i meant it literally. Back in the day the only way to overclock was with manual voltages but times have changed and imo that is not the proper way to do an overclock. Brute force would have been better terminology than caveman


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> What he is talking about isn't spokes, but the maximum voltage on the loadline, No matter how much he lowers the additional turbo voltage, the voltage under load doesn't change. I have the same issue.
> 
> Normally you can't lower the voltage below what Intel thinks the turbo voltage should be, but we are supposed to be able to get around that.
> The only thing I could do to lower that voltage is lowering LLC, but that is very coarse. I need to play with LLC and additional turbo o get a lower voltage, but I don;t have much hope there.


Its just incredibly odd, like i said a page back i actually believe adaptive is literally broken on asus board. Think im gonna give straight offset another go, maybe that will work better.


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yes i tried the best case setting, nothing changed. Again my idle volts are fine (.624) and my load volts are where i want them with llc enabled, but i want to get rid of the spikes to 1.3-1.328 while its just randomly doing things like loading up windows or even gaming, these spikes (which i have no idea why they are happening) are causing random high temp spikes for me. Why is my board asking for 1.3+v when i set 1.265v in adaptive field, have ia loadline set to .01, and select best case scenario in svid behavior.


Try playing with LLC. Set your board to run max turbo in BIOS so it simulate load. The lower LLC and reboot to the BIOS each time adjusting LLC and additional turbo voltage until you get where you want.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> Try playing with LLC. Set your board to run max turbo in BIOS so it simulate load. The lower LLC and reboot to the BIOS each time adjusting LLC and additional turbo voltage until you get where you want.


Tried that lol. No matter the LLC setting, i will get spikes from 1.312 to 1.328. You are also correct with load voltage tho, i can set .9v in the bios and i still cannot get it to go lower than what the svid think the CPU needs.

SVID is a real pita lol.


----------



## Scotty99

Whats nutty is even using a negative offset in combo with adaptive voltage does nothing, whats it there for if it changes nothing? There has to be a way to offset overclock with svid disabled.


----------



## Scotty99

Found this on kaby lake guide:
Quote:


> *The major caveat of Adaptive Mode is that the minimum possible voltage for a given ratio is pre-programmed into the CPU. If you happen to have a very good CPU that can run at a lower voltage than the minimum adaptive voltage for a given ratio, there are only two ways to lower the value. The first method is to apply an offset. That's why there is the option to apply an offset when in Adaptive mode. The offset value is added or subtracted from the Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage box, and the total is displayed in the Total Adaptive Mode CPU Core Voltage pane*. The side effect of applying an offset is that it affects the entire voltage stack - from idle to Turbo ratios, which can limit the usable offset voltage range.The second method is to use the CPU Load-line Calibration setting in the External DIGI+ Power Control section. Using a lower value will lead to more sag under load, resulting in a lower voltage. Again, the issue with this is that it will affect how much voltage the CPU receives under all loading conditions, which can lead to instability when it is too low for a given load state, or when the CPU transitions from idle to load state.\


That is 100% BROKEN, does not work like that. Asus, leader in overclocking.....hah.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Found this on kaby lake guide:
> That is 100% BROKEN, does not work like that. Asus, leader in overclocking.....hah.


Adaptive voltage is often broken on early UEFI didnt work properly on my MXF until current UEFI 1003, Kaby lake early UEFI on my M8F adaptive was also broken...its not unusual Im sure it will be sorted within a couple of UEFI updates


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Tried that lol. No matter the LLC setting, i will get spikes from 1.312 to 1.328. You are also correct with load voltage tho, i can set .9v in the bios and i still cannot get it to go lower than what the svid think the CPU needs.
> 
> SVID is a real pita lol.


You can't set adaptive below the minimum Turbo VID for the ratio.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> You can't set adaptive below the minimum Turbo VID for the ratio.


Then why is there an offset option to do so? Unless this is a whole different deal than kaby, i just posted a quote that says indeed that is possible.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Then why is there an offset option to do so? Unless this is a whole different deal than kaby, i just posted a quote that says indeed that is possible.


It was for Kaby, which is what the guide is for.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> It was for Kaby, which is what the guide is for.


Sooo wouldnt that beg the question, why is the option still there?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> You can't set adaptive below the minimum Turbo VID for the ratio.


Adaptive voltage in UEFI MXF set at 1.39V LLC5 VID 1.395V Vcore 1.376V???? But you cant set adaptive voltage lower than VID?


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> You can't set adaptive below the minimum Turbo VID for the ratio.


OK. Also too high of an LLC will apli
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Adaptive voltage in UEFI MXF set at 1.39V LLC5 VID 1.395V Vcore 1.376V???? But you cant set adaptive voltage lower than VID?


Not below the Turbo VID - the VID the processor has for Turbo frequency of 4.7GHz.


----------



## gammagoat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> It was for Kaby, which is what the guide is for.


Hey while you're here is there or is there not a VRM temp sensor on the MaxX WIFI?


----------



## GeneO

So I guess my question is what doe IA AC & DC loadline set to .01 do, if anything?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> OK. Also too high of an LLC will apli
> Not below the Turbo VID - the VID the processor has for Turbo frequency of 4.7GHz.


Ok fair enough my bad


----------



## Scotty99

So my follow up to this would be, how do i do offset overclocking on these boards lol. With offset selected and me not entering a + or - value i got something like 1.6v when booting into windows (obviously not ideal, hah). I realize asus recommends adaptive but that is not the style im used to and no other board manufacturer uses it.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> So I guess my question is what doe IA AC & DC loadline set to .01 do, if anything?


Also a good question.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> Hey while you're here is there or is there not a VRM temp sensor on the MaxX WIFI?


Also while [email protected] is here will the VRM temperature ever be monitored in the UEFI under the monitor tab so that AIDA64 can monitor the VRM temperature on Maximus X Formula?


----------



## Scotty99

Before i take off lets just make clear what this means, if you are using a asus z370 board you must use fixed voltage, unless you are ok with giving your CPU more voltage than needed with adaptive.


----------



## Essenbe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Before i take off lets just make clear what this means, if you are using a asus z370 board you must use fixed voltage, unless you are ok with giving your CPU more voltage than needed with adaptive.


Or Offset


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Essenbe*
> 
> Or Offset


Which asus recommends not to use lol (at least in their kaby lake guide). I tried doing offset when i first got my board, i literally have no idea to not get it to send 1.6v to my cpu.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Sooo wouldnt that beg the question, why is the option still there?


Perhaps they made the same mistake as you and read my guide for Kaby Lake.









Possible Intel changed something recently. I'll take a look at it.


----------



## Essenbe

Turn off SVID. With my 4.8 OC, if I set SVID to enabled I will boot at 1.552V, If I set SVID to Auto I will boot at 1.504V But, if I disable SVID I will boot at 1.168V.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Perhaps they made the same mistake as you and read my guide for Kaby Lake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Possible Intel changed something recently. I'll take a look at it.


Oh come on lol, what other info do we have to go off of? When asking questions on this forum, 99% of the replies i get are based off of that guide









But yes, some answers would be appreciated.....especially how to offset overclock given the newly found restrictions of adaptive.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Essenbe*
> 
> Turn off SVID. With my 4.8 OC, if I set SVID to enabled I will boot at 1.552V, If I set SVID to Auto I will boot at 1.504V But, if I disable SVID I will boot at 1.168V.


Ill give it a go, but as every guide i read said offset will not function will svid disabled. (maybe that is another thing that differs from kaby tho).


----------



## Essenbe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ill give it a go, but as every guide i read said offset will not function will svid disabled. (maybe that is another thing that differs from kaby tho).


All I can say is Offset with SVID Disabled works pretty good for me.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> Hey while you're here is there or is there not a VRM temp sensor on the MaxX WIFI?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Also while [email protected] is here will the VRM temperature ever be monitored in the UEFI under the monitor tab so that AIDA64 can monitor the VRM temperature on Maximus X Formula?


Anyone else hear crickets lol


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> So I guess my question is what doe IA AC & DC loadline set to .01 do, if anything?


Changes the requested VID. Obviously, it will only go down to the minimum value programmed into the CPU.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Oh come on lol, what other info do we have to go off of? When asking questions on this forum, 99% of the replies i get are based off of that guide
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But yes, some answers would be appreciated.....especially how to offset overclock given the newly found restrictions of adaptive.


Well, I've always hoped that people would progress and start writing good guides of their own. Eternal optimist, me.







Man, at this rate I'll never be able to retire. Old fogey like me should not be the person telling everyone else what to do.

In the meantime, you can apply offsets using XTU (haven't tried with AI Suite).


----------



## Scotty99

Never used xtu (actually had to google what it was) but ill give it a go









I just tried to do exactly what the guy on a page back suggested, i had a freeze before i even got into window with offset selected, .1 + offset chose (he said his loaded in at 1.16, 1.26 is what my cpu needs for 4.8).


----------



## [email protected]

There's probably a moral somewhere in that story.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> There's probably a moral somewhere in that story.


Really?

I just found a massive bug in your current bios and you are being snide with me now?


----------



## Essenbe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Never used xtu (actually had to google what it was) but ill give it a go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just tried to do exactly what the guy on a page back suggested, i had a freeze before i even got into window with offset selected, .1 + offset chose (he said his loaded in at 1.16, 1.26 is what my cpu needs for 4.8).


Are you talking about me?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Essenbe*
> 
> Are you talking about me?


Yup, you said with svid disabled you loaded into windows at 1.168v......i added .1 to the offset to hopefully load in a ~1.26 and pc crashed on windows load screen.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Really?
> 
> I just found a massive bug in your current bios and you are being snide with me now?


Not aware where it was said (by anyone that understands) that SVID isn't needed for these modes. And I wasn't being snide - thought you'd catch the drift without me needing to be blunt.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Not aware where it was said that SVID isn't needed for these modes.


Apparently you are the only person with this keen info, ive been told numerous times svid was required for adaptive/offset overclocking.

Being an asus rep and all i assume you periodically browse this thread, if svid is not required for adaptive/offset overclocking on coffee like it was kaby, why not say anything before?


----------



## Essenbe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yup, you said with svid disabled you loaded into windows at 1.168v......i added .1 to the offset to hopefully load in a ~1.26 and pc crashed on windows load screen.


My offset is + .105, which gives me 1.168V. That would be too low for you if you need 1.26. Try + .200 and see what you get. You just have to play with the offset voltage until it gets stable. Plus, we have different boards. I don't know if voltage is handled the same on all model boards.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Essenbe*
> 
> My offset is + .105, which gives me 1.168V. That would be too low for you if you need 1.26. Try + .200 and see what you get. You just have to play with the offset voltage until it gets stable.


Ah you never mentioned you entered a postive offset


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Apparently you are the only person with this keen info, ive been told numerous times svid was required for adaptive/offset overclocking.
> 
> Being an asus rep and all i assume you periodically browse this thread, if svid is not required for adaptive/offset overclocking on coffee like it was kaby, why not say anything before?


If you read my reply, it says it is needed, because the CPU needs to communicate with the external voltage regulator in order to request the VID. The only platforms this differs on is those with FIVR, because the voltage mode is (obviously) controlled on-die.


----------



## gammagoat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Anyone else hear crickets lol


Big hairy ones.

I guess this confirms that the sensor is there on some Hero X and not on others, seems the only reasonable explanation to avoid answering the question.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> If you read my reply, it says it is needed, because the CPU needs to communicate with the external voltage regulator in order to request the VID.


No you specifically stated who said it wasn't needed (insinuating you can run these modes with svid disabled).

Anyways i really dont care, glad we are now privy to the fact you cannot lower vcore with svid enabled with offset, even when there is an offset setting right below it.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*
> 
> Big hairy ones.
> 
> I guess this confirms that the sensor is there on some Hero X and not on others, seems the only reasonable explanation to avoid answering the question.


Seems to be a touchy subject


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> No you specifically stated who said it wasn't needed (insinuating you can run these modes with svid disabled)


It IS needed - always has been.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> It IS needed - always has been.


I mean with this new info about coffee how much can we take from the kaby guide, you see where im coming from raja?

The 1.168 number was pretty close btw for people wondering what offset loads into, im at 1.248 with .2 offset now.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I mean with this new info about coffee how much can we take from the kaby guide, you see where im coming from raja?
> 
> The 1.168 number was pretty close btw for people wondering what offset loads into, im at 1.248 with .2 offset now.


The only thing that stays the same between OC guides is general workflow. The intricacies are always subject to change (and there are always bugs, so nothing new going on here).

Without SVID, you'll be at the mercy of the default voltage and have to apply an offset to that. However, the CPU won't be able to communicate with the buck controller.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> The only thing that stays the same between OC guides is general workflow. The intricacies are always subject to change.
> 
> Without SVID, you'll be at the mercy of the default voltage and have to apply an offset to that. However, the CPU won't be able to communicate with the buck controller.


Id rather be at the mercy of finding an offset than having to send more volts to my cpu than needed with adaptive, just sayin









Im just annoyed at the lack of communication by asus on this one, everyone in this thread assumed you could lower adaptive voltage by using a negative offset and that is how people have been giving and receiving advice the entire thread. Now we have new info stating you cannot lower adaptive voltage with an offset, even tho the option is still there in all version of z370 bios.


----------



## l Nuke l

Is there anyway to monitor CPU power (not CPU PACKAGE) and CPU current in hwinfo64? With CPU SVID Support enabled hwinfo64 is able to read CPU power but with SVID disabled the only way I have found to monitor cpu power wattage and current is with aida64. See pic below.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Id rather be at the mercy of finding an offset than having to send more volts to my cpu than needed with adaptive, just sayin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im just annoyed at the lack of communication by asus on this one, everyone in this thread assumed you could lower adaptive voltage by using a negative offset and that is how people have been giving and receiving advice the entire thread. Now we have new info stating you cannot lower adaptive voltage with an offset, even tho the option is still there in all version of z370 bios.


It just a bug, so nobody was going to make a post until it was found. Plus, we're on the forums on our own time, so we don't always post or respond.


----------



## Scotty99

BTW i have a working overclock right now with SVID disabled and offset mode, but since svid is disabled i am unable to have volts come down at idle. (which i prefer)

Any reason why my board wants to send 1.6v to my CPU with offset mode and svid on auto lol? Wish i would have wrote the number down when i tried that months ago, -.3 i guess is a good start.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> It just a bug, so nobody was going to make a post until it was found. Plus, we're on the forums on our own time, so we don't always post or respond.


Its cool man ill just have to fiddle with offset i guess, any news for the others curious about vrm temp sensor?


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Any reason why my board wants to send 1.6v to my CPU with offset mode and svid on auto lol? Wish i would have wrote the number down when i tried that months ago, -.3 i guess is a good start.


Depends on the programmed VID table for the CPU, LLC, and the IA AC & DC load line slope.


----------



## Essenbe

@Scotty99, glad you got it working. Good job.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Essenbe*
> 
> @Scotty99, glad you got it working. Good job.


Spoke too soon, idle volts are broken (does not come down) with offset either svid enabled or disabled.......this is not how offset is supposed to work in all of my experiences since sandy bridge.

Will be picking up a asrock extreme 4, my guess is that has a properly functioning way of overclocking aside from fixed voltage.


----------



## Namrac

Hey guys, I just received my Asus Z370-P, along with an 8600K, 16GB module of Crucial Balistix Sport DDR4 2400, and a Seasonic Focus 650X modular PSU. I got everything put together, but I'm having trouble from there - it won't post, doesn't beep, doesn't display anything. The fans start to spin up and the power LED turn on for about a half second, then turn off, only to try again about 5 seconds later. This cycle will continue until I turn off the power to the PSU. I've tried removing components to get down to just CPU/mobo/RAM, I've tried swapping out for a known-working power supply, I've moved the RAM around, everything.

The decorative LED lighting on the motherboard turns on, but nothing diagnostic, and I'm at a loss for how to troubleshoot further, since I don't have any other compatible parts to swap in. Does anyone have any suggestions or advice on how to proceed from here?


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Namrac*
> 
> Hey guys, I just received my Asus Z370-P, along with an 8600K, 16GB module of Crucial Balistix Sport DDR4 2400, and a Seasonic Focus 650X modular PSU. I got everything put together, but I'm having trouble from there - it won't post, doesn't beep, doesn't display anything. The fans start to spin up and the power LED turn on for about a half second, then turn off, only to try again about 5 seconds later. This cycle will continue until I turn off the power to the PSU. I've tried removing components to get down to just CPU/mobo/RAM, I've tried swapping out for a known-working power supply, I've moved the RAM around, everything.
> 
> The decorative LED lighting on the motherboard turns on, but nothing diagnostic, and I'm at a loss for how to troubleshoot further, since I don't have any other compatible parts to swap in. Does anyone have any suggestions or advice on how to proceed from here?


Is the cpu fan hooked up? make sure everything is properly connected. Try one ram stick at a time and alternate between dimm slots, for example try ram stick "A" in slots 1, 2, 3, and 4 then try ram stick "B" in slots 1,2,3, and 4. Also make cure you used the correct psu cable for pcie and cpu just triple check all your connections.


----------



## Namrac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> Is the cpu fan hooked up? make sure everything is properly connected. Try one ram stick at a time and alternate between dimm slots, for example try ram stick "A" in slots 1, 2, 3, and 4 then try ram stick "B" in slots 1,2,3, and 4. Also make cure you used the correct psu cable for pcie and cpu just triple check all your connections.


I've only got one stick, and I've tried it in all 4 slots, as well as double checked all the connections. The only thing I can think of is a short, I'm going to pull everything out of the case and try it again.


----------



## owcraftsman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Oh come on lol, what other info do we have to go off of? When asking questions on this forum, 99% of the replies i get are based off of that guide
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But yes, some answers would be appreciated.....especially how to offset overclock given the newly found restrictions of adaptive.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I've always hoped that people would progress and start writing good guides of their own. Eternal optimist, me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Man, at this rate I'll never be able to retire. Old fogey like me should not be the person telling everyone else what to do.
> 
> In the meantime, you can apply offsets using XTU (haven't tried with AI Suite).
Click to expand...

LOL sadly it used to be the norm. Threads like this were the chronicle leading to the definitive guide back when enthusiast were real. There are still some of the dinosaurs hanging out but where are the prodigies? Now most want to google a fix and or read a guide then complain if the is no answer, In a word INDOLENT. The hard work of trial and error and documenting the results is a lost art. We wrote our own bios when things didn't function as expected of course that was before UEFI and when bios chips were replaceable. I guess, maybe, we had too much time on our hands and found the hunt more entertaining than gaming all the time. A dying breed thanks for all your hard work @[email protected]


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *owcraftsman*
> 
> LOL sadly it used to be the norm. Threads like this were the chronicle leading to the definitive guide back when enthusiast were real. There are still some of the dinosaurs hanging out but where are the prodigies? Now most want to google a fix and or read a guide then complain if the is no answer, In a word INDOLENT. The hard work of trial and error and documenting the results is a lost art. We wrote our own bios when things didn't function as expected of course that was before UEFI and when bios chips were replaceable. I guess, maybe, we had too much time on our hands and found the hunt more entertaining than gaming all the time. A dying breed thanks for all your hard work @[email protected]


Yeah, it's just how things are and have become. Perhaps there's a sense of greater entitlement due to the new generations having more at their disposal. Anyway, that's a discussion for a different format and place.

Onto the matter at hand: can someone that wants to apply an offset to adaptive voltage test the following:

1) Set the CPU Core ratio setting to "Sync all cores"
2) Apply a CPU ratio (in my case, it's 49X).
3) Set SVID behaviour to "Best case", OR leave that on Auto and set the IA AC and DC load lines to 0.01 (if you want VID to be even closer to the applied value).
4) Apply Adaptive with an offset.

On my system, the offset works fine.

What doesn't is when the CPU Core Ratio is set to "Per core". In that scenario, the offset will not be applied. It will be patched in a future update.


----------



## Scotty99

I tried all those things on my board, offset does not apply with adaptive. I have the strix-f.

The reason i brought this up in the first place is that its impossible on my board to get a 1.25v 4.8ghz OC due to SVID, i can toss a video up on youtube if you like, offset does nothing on this board. No matter what i set svid is 1.310v and those voltage spikes lead to higher gaming temps/windows temps. Again i can get load volts to come down where i want them by adjusting LLC, its the spikes i want to get rid of. Every motherboard ive ever used the max voltage you will see is the offset value i set, this is not currently achievable with my board/bios.

The spikes actually go all the way up to 1.328 with 1.25 set in bios.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I tried all those things on my board, offset does not apply with adaptive. I have the strix-f.
> 
> The reason i brought this up in the first place is that its impossible on my board to get a 1.25v 4.8ghz OC due to SVID, i can toss a video up on youtube if you like, offset does nothing on this board. No matter what i set svid is 1.310v and those voltage spikes lead to higher gaming temps/windows temps. Again i can get load volts to come down where i want them by adjusting LLC, its the spikes i want to get rid of. Every motherboard ive ever used the max voltage you will see is the offset value i set, this is not currently achievable with my board/bios.
> 
> The spikes actually go all the way up to 1.328 with 1.25 set in bios.


Works fine for me on the Apex on build 1003, with sync all cores.


----------



## l Nuke l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I tried all those things on my board, offset does not apply with adaptive. I have the strix-f.
> 
> The reason i brought this up in the first place is that its impossible on my board to get a 1.25v 4.8ghz OC due to SVID, i can toss a video up on youtube if you like, offset does nothing on this board. No matter what i set svid is 1.310v and those voltage spikes lead to higher gaming temps/windows temps. Again i can get load volts to come down where i want them by adjusting LLC, its the spikes i want to get rid of. Every motherboard ive ever used the max voltage you will see is the offset value i set, this is not currently achievable with my board/bios.
> 
> The spikes actually go all the way up to 1.328 with 1.25 set in bios.


That could be due to intel specs for these cpus. Pretty sure these chips do that at stock.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Hmm. I will have to take a very close look at what Adaptive is doing on my Maximus X Hero wifi. Another thing to worry about. Kudos to Scotty for digging into this.

Speaking of things to worry about - RAJA can you PLEASE take a moment to respond to the VRM temp sensor issue for the Maximus X Hero wifi board? Mine does not show VRM Temp in the BIOS or in HWINFO, AIDA, or SIV. Some people see a value in HWINFO in the Asus EC section but not in the BIOS.

According to the authors of HWINFO and AIDA, Asus changed a PWM controller chip in the VRM section of the Hero boards and the boards with this new component do not report VRM Temps. On the Asus website for the Hero wifi, a VRM Temp sensor is shown.

So, the questions are simple. Does the Maximus X Hero (wifi) report VRM Temp or not? Did a component swap occur that resulted in no VRM Temp value being reported?

PLEASE stop ignoring all posts about this and just answer this question.

Thank you.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *l Nuke l*
> 
> That could be due to intel specs for these cpus. Pretty sure these chips do that at stock.


Very possible as ive heard two people now say this is "normal". I can only speak from experience with other boards that using offset i never saw these spikes before, what i set in bios is the max voltage i would see in windows at any point in time. I just know that these spikes are contributing to higher than expected temps while gaming/mucking around on the PC.

I also know adaptive is not offset, i just wish offset worked on this board. (no low idle cpu volts, stability seems sketchy). With adaptive i do have a perfectly functioning daily OC with 1.4v at 5.0, but again these spikes i cannot get rid of (spikes to 1.440 just installing an update to a program for example).

This probably does not bother most people as it seems many are cool with fixed volts, i am just particular







I am also curious about vrm temp sensor readings too.


----------



## Sverre

hm...Adaptive Mode??

Apex on build 1003, with

SVID Behavior [Best-Case Scenario]
AVX Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [0]
sync all cores 50
CPU Core/Cache Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
- Offset Mode Sign [-]
- Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage [1.333]
- Offset Voltage [0.001]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
Long Duration Package Power Limit [4095]
Package Power Time Window [127]
Short Duration Package Power Limit [4095]
IA AC Load Line [0.01]
IA DC Load Line [0.01]

Test..
hwinfo and
prime95 29.4 small FFTs
CpuSupportsAVX=0
VID: 1,335 -> Vcore: 1,296

CpuSupportsAVX=1
VID: 1,36 -1,359 -> Vcore:1,312

Multimeter the same..


----------



## GeneO

@Raja

Maxixmus code X, 1003 BIOS
BIOS set for turbo performance (so can see turbo voltage in BIOS)
LLC 5, SVID optimistic, all cores

1.28v additional volts, auto offset vcore=1.28

1.28v additional volts, offset = ,05 vcore=1.328

So offset works with code


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Thats exactly how i have my adaptive setup (but with 1.265 punched in, and llc6). Never heard of the svid behavior, ill give that a shot.
> 
> Nope, still 1.312-1.328. Of course it will come down to .656 or whatever at idle and load volts are what i want them to be, but what im trying to do is get rid of the voltage spikes to 1.3+. Is there not a way to achieve this?


you cannot set 'ADDITIONAL' turbo mode voltage to a value below the VID for a given frequency. The best way to run an OC below the VID for that frequency is good old manual override.


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you cannot set 'ADDITIONAL' turbo mode voltage to a value below the VID for a given frequency. The best way to run an OC below the VID for that frequency is good old manual override.


- below the CPU VID of the Turbo frequency of 4.7 GHz


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you cannot set 'ADDITIONAL' turbo mode voltage to a value below the VID for a given frequency. The best way to run an OC below the VID for that frequency is good old manual override.


Going to link this one more time for the monday morning quarterbacks:
Quote:


> The major caveat of Adaptive Mode is that the minimum possible voltage for a given ratio is pre-programmed into the CPU. If you happen to have a very good CPU that can run at a lower voltage than the minimum adaptive voltage for a given ratio, there are only two ways to lower the value. *The first method is to apply an offset. That's why there is the option to apply an offset when in Adaptive mode. The offset value is added or subtracted from the Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage box*, and the total is displayed in the Total Adaptive Mode CPU Core Voltage pane.


What im trying to achieve was possible on kaby but apparently not on coffee.


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Going to link this one more time for the monday morning quarterbacks:
> What im trying to achieve was possible on kaby but apparently not on coffee.


Adaptive offset works for me on coffee, though I don't use it.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> Adaptive offset works for me on coffee, though I don't use it.


Did you try negative?


----------



## GeneO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Did you try negative?


Just did while you were posting. Not below turbo VID.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GeneO*
> 
> - below the CPU VID of the Turbo frequency of 4.7 GHz


or 4.8. 4.9.. etc.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Going to link this one more time for the monday morning quarterbacks:
> What im trying to achieve was possible on kaby but apparently not on coffee.


frankly, running a negative offset with additional turbo voltage can present some issues... that said, I can get the negative offset to decrease the total voltage at load. I'll give it another try with this new bios loaded (1003)


----------



## Scotty99

Weird on strix-f negative offset does nothing, only way to decrease load volts is LLC. But again load volts arent an issue neither are idle, its the spikes that are bothersome for me. Asus being the only ones (that i know of) that use adaptive instead of straight offset, i probably bought the wrong board. Id be cool with it if offset option worked but it doesnt, idle volts do not come down and getting the overclock stable with pure offset hasnt been possible for me.


----------



## Scotty99

Testing


----------



## SpeedyIV

Scotty99 said:


> Weird on strix-f negative offset does nothing, only way to decrease load volts is LLC. But again load volts arent an issue neither are idle, its the spikes that are bothersome for me. Asus being the only ones (that i know of) that use adaptive instead of straight offset, i probably bought the wrong board. Id be cool with it if offset option worked but it doesnt, idle volts do not come down and getting the overclock stable with pure offset hasnt been possible for me.


How are you seeing these spikes? What kind of duration are you talking about? Are they getting captured in the MAX column of HWiNFO or similar, or are you using an O-Scope?

Thanks!


----------



## bud74

SpeedyIV said:


> How are you seeing these spikes? What kind of duration are you talking about? Are they getting captured in the MAX column of HWiNFO or similar, or are you using an O-Scope?
> 
> Thanks!


QLED on my Maximus X Hero is showing 00 when Windows opens when I have it set to temp in bios. When I have it set to post code only, it shows A0 after Windows loads which is normal. I didn't change anything in bios and everything else seems to be running fine. Any ideas guys and gals? Any help will be much appreciated!


----------



## SpeedyIV

bud74 said:


> QLED on my Maximus X Hero is showing 00 when Windows opens when I have it set to temp in bios. When I have it set to post code only, it shows A0 after Windows loads which is normal. I didn't change anything in bios and everything else seems to be running fine. Any ideas guys and gals? Any help will be much appreciated!


On my Hero wifi, when I set Q-Code LED to Auto, I see CPU temp displayed after Windows loads. If I set it to POST Code Only, I get code A0. Sounds like yours is not showing temperature. I am on BIOS 1003 btw. What I am NOT seeing is a VRM temp - im the BIOS or anywhere else (HWiNFO, AIDA, SIV).


----------



## bud74

SpeedyIV said:


> On my Hero wifi, when I set Q-Code LED to Auto, I see CPU temp displayed after Windows loads. If I set it to POST Code Only, I get code A0. Sounds like yours is not showing temperature. I am on BIOS 1003 btw. What I am NOT seeing is a VRM temp - im the BIOS or anywhere else (HWiNFO, AIDA, SIV).


When I set Q-code to auto, I am now getting 00 when Windows loads. Post code only gives me A0. I am trying to figure out what changed to the point where I don't get temp reading anymore when I set it to auto. My post wasn't very clear up top now that I read it again.


----------



## Jpmboy

On this MAX X APEX, with adaptive set to 1.375V in bios and Offset set to Auto, the system idles (windows HP mode) at 1.392V (fine, 16mV increment) and loads to 1.360V (RB H.264 module). Balanced mode idle is at 0.688V.
If I set a negative offset of 0.01V (so total adaptive V is 1.365V), the system idles at 1.376V (HP mode) and loads to 1.344V (RB H.264 module). Bios 1003, windows 10 patched. Windows is running uCode update revision 7Ch.
IA AC and DC load lines are at 0.01. LLC 5. CPU SVID = Best Case Scenario. Synch All Cores :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

[email protected] said:


> Quote: Originally Posted by *owcraftsman*
> 
> 
> LOL sadly it used to be the norm. Threads like this were the chronicle leading to the definitive guide back when enthusiast were real. There are still some of the dinosaurs hanging out but where are the prodigies? Now most want to google a fix and or read a guide then complain if the is no answer, In a word INDOLENT. The hard work of trial and error and documenting the results is a lost art. We wrote our own bios when things didn't function as expected of course that was before UEFI and when bios chips were replaceable. I guess, maybe, we had too much time on our hands and found the hunt more entertaining than gaming all the time. A dying breed thanks for all your hard work @[email protected]
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, it's just how things are and have become. Perhaps there's a sense of greater entitlement due to the new generations having more at their disposal. Anyway, that's a discussion for a different format and place.
> Onto the matter at hand: can someone that wants to apply an offset to adaptive voltage test the following:
> 1) Set the CPU Core ratio setting to "Sync all cores"
> 2) Apply a CPU ratio (in my case, it's 49X).
> 3) Set SVID behaviour to "Best case", OR leave that on Auto and set the IA AC and DC load lines to 0.01 (if you want VID to be even closer to the applied value).
> 4) Apply Adaptive with an offset.
> On my system, the offset works fine.
> What doesn't is when the CPU Core Ratio is set to "Per core". In that scenario, the offset will not be applied. It will be patched in a future update.


works fine with synch cores as posted above.



And for anyone interested, here are my daily settings (neg offset not needed)


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> On this MAX X APEX, with adaptive set to 1.375V in bios and Offset set to Auto, the system idles (windows HP mode) at 1.392V (fine, 16mV increment) and loads to 1.360V (RB H.264 module). Balanced mode idle is at 0.688V.
> If I set a negative offset of 0.01V (so total adaptive V is 1.365V), the system idles at 1.376V (HP mode) and loads to 1.344V (RB H.264 module). Bios 1003, windows 10 patched. Windows is running uCode update revision 7Ch.
> IA AC and DC load lines are at 0.01. LLC 5. CPU SVID = Best Case Scenario. Synch All Cores :thumb:


I've got the exact settings you have, my voltage running RB H.264 is 1.408v


----------



## Scotty99

SpeedyIV said:


> How are you seeing these spikes? What kind of duration are you talking about? Are they getting captured in the MAX column of HWiNFO or similar, or are you using an O-Scope?
> 
> Thanks!


Yep max column in HWinfo, and these spikes can happen for 30 seconds at a time depending on what im doing. Playing a game i can see 1.328v when 1.265 is set in bios, yet opening a stress test it will go down to where i want it when an actual full load is on the system. My CPU jumped to 74c the other day just doing a overwatch update (spiked to 1.328 during that update) i just dont get why its doing that.

PS this new forum sucks lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> I've got the exact settings you have, my voltage running RB H.264 is 1.408v


somethin ain't right.. or the same. can you post up bios screenies? 1.408 and 1.392 are likely VERY close when measured off the MB. Do you have a DMM?


----------



## ChaosAD

Jpmboy said:


> On this MAX X APEX, with adaptive set to 1.375V in bios and Offset set to Auto, the system idles (windows HP mode) at 1.392V (fine, 16mV increment) and loads to 1.360V (RB H.264 module). Balanced mode idle is at 0.688V.
> If I set a negative offset of 0.01V (so total adaptive V is 1.365V), the system idles at 1.376V (HP mode) and loads to 1.344V (RB H.264 module). Bios 1003, windows 10 patched. Windows is running uCode update revision 7Ch.
> IA AC and DC load lines are at 0.01. LLC 5. CPU SVID = Best Case Scenario. Synch All Cores :thumb:


With all options the same as you, except LLC to 6, if i set adaptive at 1.24v i get 1.28v, so i have to play with - offset to get the vcore i need for 5Ghz (Hero X with 1003 bios)

Question, how do u get idle at 0.688v at balanced. I also have balanced and idles at 800Mhz at 0.8v


----------



## Jpmboy

ChaosAD said:


> With all options the same as you, except LLC to 6, if i set adaptive at 1.24v i get 1.28v, so i have to play with - offset to get the vcore i need for 5Ghz (Hero X with 1003 bios)
> 
> Question, how do u get idle at 0.688v at balanced. I also have balanced and idles at 800Mhz at 0.8v


Before playing with negative offset, try LLC 5. The idle voltage is related to the cpu VID and possibly the c-states. Check advanced power settings and set min proc state to 0% (not sure if that will do anything about the idle voltage tho).


----------



## ChaosAD

Jpmboy said:


> Before playing with negative offset, try LLC 5. The idle voltage is related to the cpu VID and possibly the c-states. Check advanced power settings and set min proc state to 0% (not sure if that will do anything about the idle voltage tho).


Ok i ll also check LLC5 to see what i ll get. Min proc state to 0% already, forgot to mention, and all cstates are on. But still at 0.8v


----------



## Jpmboy

ChaosAD said:


> Ok i ll also check LLC5 to see what i ll get. Min proc state to 0% already, forgot to mention, and all cstates are on. But still at 0.8v


yeah, when using adaptive, c-states are really not necessary. I keep them disabled.


----------



## ChaosAD

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, when using adaptive, c-states are really not necessary. I keep them disabled.


Didnt know that, i ll check with them disabled then!


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> somethin ain't right.. or the same. can you post up bios screenies? 1.408 and 1.392 are likely VERY close when measured off the MB. Do you have a DMM?


I'm going to have a proper play today, will start by clearing cmos and go from scratch.
Just changing current settings to what you have (minus the ram settings) still gets me a spike of 1.408v, saw on the dmm as well.


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> I'm going to have a proper play today, will start by clearing cmos and go from scratch.
> Just changing current settings to what you have (minus the ram settings) still gets me a spike of 1.408v, saw on the dmm as well.


I'd chalk that small difference up to sample variance... 10 mV is just too little to be worried about. Set the bios value lower - will it lower this peak value accordingly?


----------



## l Nuke l

So I noticed most people here have their turbo mode parameters in bios set like so.. I am curious as to why most don't just set these to the max value?


----------



## Jpmboy

l Nuke l said:


> So I noticed most people here have their turbo mode parameters in bios set like so.. I am curious as to why most don't just set these to the max value?


127 is the max duration the power window can be set to. the 300Watt limit is a "personal" decision". for ambient cooling, we're not gonna exceed that value, so it has no benefit to set it higher.


----------



## l Nuke l

Jpmboy said:


> 127 is the max duration the power window can be set to. the 300Watt limit is a "personal" decision". for ambient cooling, we're not gonna exceed that value, so it has no benefit to set it higher.


And short duration?


----------



## Jpmboy

l Nuke l said:


> And short duration?


is always 2x the long value unless you set it higher.


----------



## l Nuke l

Jpmboy said:


> is always 2x the long value unless you set it higher.


Ah okay. So thats why people leave it on auto. Cool. Thanks dude.


----------



## Jpmboy

you be welcome.


----------



## SpeedyIV

*Maximus X Hero wifi VRM Temp Sensor - DIY*



Jpmboy said:


> Quote:Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I was also thinking about just putting a *thermal probe right on the heat sink*. That should at least be as accurate as an IR Thermometer right? Maybe I can sneak a probe up under the heat sink. It's better than nothing (which is what ASUS has evidently decided to provide). Got nothing to lose.
> 
> Absolutely, would be the same surface temp as an IRT. Just stick one of the thermocouples right on it (or slip one under).





SpeedyIV said:


>  RAJA can you PLEASE take a moment to respond to the VRM temp sensor issue for the Maximus X Hero wifi board? Does the Maximus X Hero (wifi) report VRM Temp or not? Did a component swap occur that resulted in no VRM Temp value being reported?
> 
> PLEASE stop ignoring all posts about this and just answer this question.
> 
> Thank you.


Well I actually managed to get 2 thermal probes down inside of my VRM heat sink (MXH-wifi). One is plugged into T_2 Sensor header and the other one is plugged into a Corsair Commander Pro which I use (with SIV) for temperature monitoring and fan /LED control. I ran a few CPU stress tests (BIOS at defaults at the moment) while monitoring T_2 Sensor in HWINFO and the Corsair Commander Pro sensor in SIV. I got a max of 38C from both sensors which seems reasonable for running at stock. 

There is really no way to validate that these temp probes are accurate (except maybe go buy an IR gun) but at least I have something in place to monitor VRM temps. Next I will set a ~4.8GHz OC and see what numbers I get when I push it a bit. Probably not a problem but I want to at least keep an eye on VRM temps when I go for 5GHz. I am still working on a pre delid baseline. 

It appears that Asus has no comment on the mysterious disappearing VRM temp sensor on the MX Hero (and wifi) so I guess it's case closed. At least T_2 Sensor seems to be working and getting reported properly in HWINFO. And I have learned that apparently Asus thinks it's ok to remove an advertised feature, then refuse to acknowledge it or comment at all. What can I say - Does it suck? YES. Will I buy an Asus board in the future? Probably...


----------



## gammagoat

SpeedyIV said:


> Well I actually managed to get 2 thermal probes down inside of my VRM heat sink (MXH-wifi). One is plugged into T_2 Sensor header and the other one is plugged into a Corsair Commander Pro which I use (with SIV) for temperature monitoring and fan /LED control. I ran a few CPU stress tests (BIOS at defaults at the moment) while monitoring T_2 Sensor in HWINFO and the Corsair Commander Pro sensor in SIV. I got a max of 38C from both sensors which seems reasonable for running at stock.
> 
> There is really no way to validate that these temp probes are accurate (except maybe go buy an IR gun) but at least I have something in place to monitor VRM temps. Next I will set a ~4.8GHz OC and see what numbers I get when I push it a bit. Probably not a problem but I want to at least keep an eye on VRM temps when I go for 5GHz. I am still working on a pre delid baseline.
> 
> It appears that Asus has no comment on the mysterious disappearing VRM temp sensor on the MX Hero (and wifi) so I guess it's case closed. At least T_2 Sensor seems to be working and getting reported properly in HWINFO. And I have learned that apparently Asus thinks it's ok to remove an advertised feature, then refuse to acknowledge it or comment at all. What can I say - Does it suck? YES. Will I buy an Asus board in the future? Probably...


I appreciate you posting this, I am going to do this also. I'll probably take off the heatsinks and fix the probe as close to one of the vrm as possible.

Raja, was saved by the Great OCN outage of 2018.(should be a smilie here)

I hope that Asrock puts out The formula model for Z390. I like my Hero, if Asus would just fess up I would feel better about buying Asus again.


----------



## scracy

gammagoat said:


> I appreciate you posting this, I am going to do this also. I'll probably take off the heatsinks and fix the probe as close to one of the vrm as possible.
> 
> Raja, was saved by the Great OCN outage of 2018.(should be a smilie here)
> 
> I hope that Asrock puts out The formula model for Z390. I like my Hero, if Asus would just fess up I would feel better about buying Asus again.


The silence on this issue is deafening and I agree that Asus should at the very least make some kind of statement about this and just be honest about it. I'm one of the fortunate ones and I know my MXF has thermal sensors for the VRM but whether not I will be able monitor them with AIDA64 at any stage looks doubtful.


----------



## SpeedyIV

gammagoat said:


> I appreciate you posting this, I am going to do this also. I'll probably take off the heatsinks and fix the probe as close to one of the vrm as possible.
> 
> Raja, was saved by the Great OCN outage of 2018.(should be a smilie here)
> 
> I hope that Asrock puts out The formula model for Z390. I like my Hero, if Asus would just fess up I would feel better about buying Asus again.





scracy said:


> The silence on this issue is deafening and I agree that Asus should at the very least make some kind of statement about this and just be honest about it. I'm one of the fortunate ones and I know my MXF has thermal sensors for the VRM but whether not I will be able monitor them with AIDA64 at any stage looks doubtful.


Yeah I directly asked Raja right before OCN went down. Just my luck I guess. But the 5 page thread about this on the ROG forum (which he has also been actively posting on) did not go down. Silence there as well. Scracy - so your MXF has the VRM sensor? How do you know? Does it show up in the BIOS? HWINFO? Reported through EC?

I looked at taking the heat sink off. Looking from the back I think there are small screws or fasteners on the back of the board in the right places to be for the VRM. I didn't try it but was able to get the temp sensors right up against one of the VRM cans from the front. The 2 sensors are reporting the same value, which is encouraging, but I have no idea if the readings are accurate.


----------



## scracy

SpeedyIV said:


> Yeah I directly asked Raja right before OCN went down. Just my luck I guess. But the 5 page thread about this on the ROG forum (which he has also been actively posting on) did not go down. Silence there as well. Scracy - so your MXF has the VRM sensor? How do you know? Does it show up in the BIOS? HWINFO? Reported through EC?
> 
> I looked at taking the heat sink off. Looking from the back I think there are small screws or fasteners on the back of the board in the right places to be for the VRM. I didn't try it but was able to get the temp sensors right up against one of the VRM cans from the front. The 2 sensors are reporting the same value, which is encouraging, but I have no idea if the readings are accurate.


I know the VRM temperature sensor is there on my MXF because HWinfo reports a temperature for it through the EC bus however this is useless to me because unless it appears under my monitor tab in the UEFI AIDA64 cannot read the temperature value. I can't see Asus fixing this because it seems as though some boards don't have the sensor to begin with so if they enable monitoring within the UEFI then it becomes pretty obvious which boards have it fitted and which boards don't. I'm not sure if it will effect MXF owners like myself (have not heard if any other owners not being able to read VRM temps through HWinfo) but those with a MXH or MXH WiFi seem to have the most inconsistency, some can read VRM temps with HWinfo and some can't. I'm a self professed ROG fan boy but quite honestly the way this issue has been ignored numurous times is very disappointing especially given the price point of these boards and the reputation they once had. I really have to question if I would buy another ROG product in the future. What's the point of having an Asus representative on these forums if he won't answer this question which has been asked directly many times?


----------



## bl4ckdot

I have a question about the Formula X, I just tested it before building my rig to see if everything was fine and I didn't paid attention to the OLED display which was off if I trust my pic before putting it back to its box.
Is it off by default ?


----------



## l Nuke l

so I placed a 140mm fan over the vrms on my mobo and got a 6c temp drop. I plan on setting up a chiller in the near future and when I do I was thinking about removing the vrm heatsinks and just have that 140mm fan blowing directly on the vrms. Does anyone have experience with this? Will this further improve vrm thermals? I know vrm temps on this platform arent an issue but removing the heatsinks seems easy enough so If temps can benefit from it I wanna do it.

.. The noctua is ugly, i know, i know lol i plan on replacing it with a gelid(black and white fan).


----------



## Scotty99

So im trying to do some stock clock testing on my 8700k, but i cannot get one core to boost to 4.7 no matter what im doing lol. MCE on or mce off it boosts to 4.3 on all cores at all times, never does any one core boost to 4.7ghz like it should. Do i need to disable xmp to get the CPU to work like it should?


----------



## Jpmboy

l Nuke l said:


> so I placed a 140mm fan over the vrms on my mobo and got a 6c temp drop. I plan on setting up a chiller in the near future and when I do I was thinking about removing the vrm heatsinks and just have that 140mm fan blowing directly on the vrms. Does anyone have experience with this? Will this further improve vrm thermals? I know vrm temps on this platform arent an issue but removing the heatsinks seems easy enough so If temps can benefit from it I wanna do it.
> 
> .. The noctua is ugly, i know, i know lol i plan on replacing it with a gelid(black and white fan).


I would not try to cool the bare VRMs without some sort of heat spreader, sink or block on them. They will run hotter without some sort of attached cooling device... unless you use a screaming delta fan on them. 



Scotty99 said:


> So im trying to do some stock clock testing on my 8700k, but i cannot get one core to boost to 4.7 no matter what im doing lol. MCE on or mce off it boosts to 4.3 on all cores at all times, never does any one core boost to 4.7ghz like it should. Do i need to disable xmp to get the CPU to work like it should?


At stock, the chip will not load all cores at the max turbo frequency by design... until you... Synch All Cores.


----------



## Scotty99

Jpmboy said:


> I would not try to cool the bare VRMs without some sort of heat spreader, sink or block on them. They will run hotter without some sort of attached cooling device... unless you use a screaming delta fan on them.
> 
> 
> At stock, the chip will not load all cores at the max turbo frequency by design... until you... Synch All Cores.


No no thats not what im looking to do, i want bone stock operation (testing wow against my ryzen pc) but no matter what i do it will not boost any of the cores to 4.7 as it should be doing. When i have wow up (which uses 2 cores at best) all cores load at 4.3ghz which is the stock all core boost, 4.7ghz will never show up on the max frequency tab of hwinfo.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> No no thats not what im looking to do, i want bone stock operation (testing wow against my ryzen pc) but no matter what i do it will not boost any of the cores to 4.7 as it should be doing. When i have wow up (which uses 2 cores at best) all cores load at 4.3ghz which is the stock all core boost, 4.7ghz will never show up on the max frequency tab of hwinfo.


hit clrcmos, no XMP and see what it does. Asus MCE is a variant of the underlying Intel MCE.. which can;t be disabled in bios. XMP may be causing the issue (XMP is not "stock"). :thumb:


----------



## Scotty99

Ya its definitely xmp, same thing happening to this guy with a gigabyte board:
http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1645297-8700k-doesn-t-exceeds-4-3-ghz-stock-6.html

Just makes no sense to me, buy faster ram and motherboard manufacturers will nerf your cpu? Again i tried MCE on and off made zero difference the max boost was 4.3, only disabling xmp and running ram at 2133 would the max turbo frequency kick in.

What im really curious about is how do sites like digital foundry get around this issue, or are they even aware of it? That guy loves doing ram speed testing lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> Ya its definitely xmp, same thing happening to this guy with a gigabyte board:
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1645297-8700k-doesn-t-exceeds-4-3-ghz-stock-6.html
> 
> Just makes no sense to me, buy faster ram and motherboard manufacturers will nerf your cpu? Again i tried MCE on and off made zero difference the max boost was 4.3, only disabling xmp and running ram at 2133 would the max turbo frequency kick in.
> 
> What im really curious about is how do sites like digital foundry get around this issue, or are they even aware of it? That guy loves doing ram speed testing lol.


I've never been a fan of XMP. Just enter the XMP primary timings and voltage manually. Set the necessary VSA and VCCIO. This will run the default per-core boost properly. XMP changes many settings, some of which we do not have access to via the UEFI bios. It's more the XMP programming than the boards. Is that kit on the QVL?


----------



## scracy

bl4ckdot said:


> I have a question about the Formula X, I just tested it before building my rig to see if everything was fine and I didn't paid attention to the OLED display which was off if I trust my pic before putting it back to its box.
> Is it off by default ?


Mine was not off by default but you can toggle it off from the UEFI


----------



## l Nuke l

Jpmboy said:


> I would not try to cool the bare VRMs without some sort of heat spreader, sink or block on them. They will run hotter without some sort of attached cooling device... unless you use a screaming delta fan on them.
> 
> 
> At stock, the chip will not load all cores at the max turbo frequency by design... until you... Synch All Cores.


Thats what i was afraid of. Guess ill be keepin the heat sinks on


----------



## DStealth

Apex is on another level in memory OC...Any suggestions for newer BIOS than 0703 ?
2x8GB DDR4-4173 12-12-12-28 1T 49/50/6/6


----------



## kevindd992002

I couldn't agree more. Raja, as a representative, sucks big time. He should not be called a rep, if it was to me. With this kind of support from Asus, I would be thinking twice of getting an Asus board in the future too. What a PITA!


----------



## Scotty99

I know people are probably sick of hearing about this from me but, on my strix-f it is literally impossible to drop my voltage with adaptive. People have claimed in this thread they have had success using a negative offset in tandem with adaptive to achieve this, on my board it does nothing. I can get full load voltage to drop to where i want it (~1.265-1.280) by adjust llc levels, but i cannot get rid of the high voltages when gaming (1.312-1.328). SVID is taking over so much you dont even need to enter a voltage in the additional turbo adaptive field, for 4.8ghz it will set the same voltage if i leave it blank, put 1.265, put .01 etc, it will load into windows at 1.296v with spikes to 1.328. If i try and do a negative offset (for example 1.296 in adaptive mod box, and .025 in negative offset mode) it literally does nothing (despite it changing in total adaptive mode field in bios), it will still spike to 1.328 and the voltage stack does not get affected at any of the turbo mode ranges.

If anyone has a suggestion on how to get adaptive working properly, it would be mucho appreciado.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Guys don't be too hard on Raja, remember while he may work for Asus, he does this in his own free time.

Still can't get Adaptive working correctly on my Apex.
I'm starting to think it's got a lot to do with individual CPU's SVID tables.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Stupid new forum and stupid double post :-(


----------



## Scotty99

It does have to do with that, the question is why can you not set a negative offset in tandem with adaptive! And you cant disable svid, adaptive offset disappears when you do so.

Literally only way to overclock on these boards is with manual voltage.


----------



## l Nuke l

DStealth said:


> Apex is on another level in memory OC...Any suggestions for newer BIOS than 0703 ?
> 2x8GB DDR4-4173 12-12-12-28 1T 49/50/6/6


Are you running the updated windows 10? Or you benchmarking on the pre spectre/meltdown windows version?


----------



## SpeedyIV

schoolofmonkey said:


> Guys don't be too hard on Raja, remember while he may work for Asus, he does this in his own free time.
> 
> Still can't get Adaptive working correctly on my Apex.
> I'm starting to think it's got a lot to do with individual CPU's SVID tables.


I don't know if the time he spends on forums is "paid time" or not. I know the Corsair reps on their forum absolutely consider it part of the job. Their presence is constant, but limited to 9 to 5 PCT. Really don't know what his "title" is but I assume it's marketing related. That said, if Asus did change a component, which resulted in no VRM temp reporting on some boards but not others, and they decided not to own up to it (maybe hoped noone would notice or care), then I guess I don't expect him to rat them out, especially if the company line is "No Comment". The hand that feeds comes first. 

IMHO, Asus makes some of the best boards, and their UEFI BIOS is the best. At least it's what I am most familiar with. I think a lot of people tend to stick with one brand for MOBOs (Moboos?). If I changed brands it would likely be to Gigabyte, though there would have to be a significant price to feature advantage for me to do it. So go ahead Asus - take away my VRM temp sensor then refuse to comment. I'll be back for a post Spectre/Meltdown Z570 / 8-core / 6GHz / DDR4-5600MHz wonder-board with 4 x AURA10.0 RG2xBYW Super-Double-Duper LED (SDD-LED) ports on it. ?


----------



## Jpmboy

SpeedyIV said:


> I don't know if the time he spends on forums is "paid time" or not. I know the Corsair reps on their forum absolutely consider it part of the job. Their presence is constant, but limited to 9 to 5 PCT. Really don't know what his "title" is but I assume it's marketing related. That said, if Asus did change a component, which resulted in no VRM temp reporting on some boards but not others, and they decided not to own up to it (maybe hoped noone would notice or care), then I guess I don't expect him to rat them out, especially if the company line is "No Comment". The hand that feeds comes first.
> 
> IMHO, Asus makes some of the best boards, and their UEFI BIOS is the best. At least it's what I am most familiar with. I think a lot of people tend to stick with one brand for MOBOs (Moboos?). If I changed brands it would likely be to Gigabyte, though there would have to be a significant price to feature advantage for me to do it. So go ahead Asus - take away my VRM temp sensor then refuse to comment. I'll be back for a post Spectre/Meltdown Z570 / 8-core / 6GHz / DDR4-5600MHz wonder-board with 4 x AURA10.0 RG2xBYW Super-Double-Duper LED (SDD-LED) ports on it. ?


Paid for browsing Fora (ums?) :blinksmil. I'm sure he wishes it were so. As you all know, for salaried (exempt) folks the work day does not end when you leave the office/facility.

The VRM thing is curious, but with all the _sheet _happening right now due to the Intel panic, i can;t imagine this level issue is on anyone's "find out" list - sorry to be frank. Lol - I if it were you gotta ask why it should be! It's not affecting the functioning or performance of the board(s), so naturally not top of any list. However, I do understand your (-all) dissatisfaction.

I'll say it again, VRM temperatures are not limiting on this platform. x299 - yeah, I'd be real concerned since these can top out VERY quickly.


----------



## Jpmboy

ugh - double post bork


----------



## GeneO

Scotty99 said:


> It does have to do with that, the question is why can you not set a negative offset in tandem with adaptive! And you cant disable svid, adaptive offset disappears when you do so.
> 
> Literally only way to overclock on these boards is with manual voltage.


SVID is required for adaptive. If you are coming from Haswell this may be unexpected. With Haswell, the regulator was on the chip (FIVR), so it could all be done internally without any communication to the Motherboard voltage regulator, so you could disable SVID. Post Haswell, in order for the processor to adjust voltage in adaptive mode, it needs to communicate with the Motherboard voltage regulator to tell it to adjust the voltage. So SVID needs to be enabled. 

I believe Raja has filed a bug on the offset not working with adaptive mode.


----------



## Jpmboy

*Deja vu, all over again.*



l Nuke l said:


> Are you running the updated windows 10? Or you benchmarking on the pre spectre/meltdown windows version?


in order to get 4000+ c12 to behave you need to use a 32bit OS or limit windows to 4096KB of memory. It's very unstable (if it will boot) otherwise.


GeneO said:


> *SVID is required for adaptive. If you are coming from Haswell this may be unexpected. With Haswell, the regulator was on the chip (FIVR), so it could all be done internally without any communication to the Motherboard voltage regulator, so you could disable SVID. Post Haswell, in order for the processor to adjust voltage in adaptive mode, it needs to communicate with the Motherboard voltage regulator to tell it to adjust the voltage. So SVID needs to be enabled. *
> 
> I believe Raja has filed a bug on the offset not working with adaptive mode.


^^ This
offset works fine with adaptive. I posted data from this Max X Apex some days ago. @*Scotty99* keeps "perseverating" to this same issue, and needs to grasp that dynamic voltage, which uses the VID table to calculate a voltage, needs the IR request comm link ON (eg, SVID). As you point out, this is why when SVID is disabled, Adaptive is not available. Additionally, adaptive alone cannot run lower than the VID request (it's additional voltage.. as it was and still is listed on z87 boards. Yeah, been using it since back then on an asrock E3Gen3 board with a 2700K that's on 24/7/365 - still).
The best method to run lower than the VID (on any platform) is manual override (eg, you want to override the VID request). Some CPUs just work best this way. 
my :2cents:

If you guys have not come across it, dark wizzie's kaby guide is good reading


----------



## Scotty99

Who said i had svid disabled, what lol? I simply stated adaptive does not work with it disabled.

Again people on my motherboard with adaptive mode selected offset does literally nothing, the only way to drop load volts is with LLC.

Anyways dont matter, asrock extreme 4 will be here tuesday.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> Some CPUs just work best this way.
> my :2cents:


Like mine, it does overshoot your cpu's voltage on adaptive using your settings, not by much.
Quiet happy to stick with the tried and true manual settings....

Where the heck are the emoji icons now...


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> Who said i had svid disabled, what lol? I simply stated adaptive does not work with it disabled.
> 
> Again people on my motherboard with adaptive mode selected offset does literally nothing, the only way to drop load volts is with LLC.
> 
> Anyways dont matter, asrock extreme 4 will be here tuesday.


cool, enjoy the extreme 4. :thumb:



schoolofmonkey said:


> Like mine, it does overshoot your cpu's voltage on adaptive using your settings, not by much.
> Quiet happy to stick with the tried and true manual settings....
> Where the heck are the emoji icons now...


yeah - fixed vcore is a sure thing, and with c-states enabled, it's teets.


----------



## DStealth

l Nuke l said:


> Are you running the updated windows 10? Or you benchmarking on the pre spectre/meltdown windows version?


 W7 64bit


----------



## l Nuke l

DStealth said:


> W7 64bit


Oh okay.


----------



## chibi

Fixed CPU Core with C-States enabled - does this lower your idle vcore? Sorry, my rig is out of commission pending a gpu swap so can't test.


----------



## Jpmboy

chibi said:


> Fixed CPU Core with C-States enabled - does this lower your idle vcore? Sorry, my rig is out of commission pending a gpu swap so can't test.


not in a way you can see with OS tools. c-states Idle specific cores, the wake cores receive the voltage set in bios. It's better to focus on the wattage/current the core is using when at idle. There is only a very little difference between manual and adaptive in the resting state.


----------



## GeneO

Jpmboy said:


> not in a way you can see with OS tools. c-states Idle specific cores, the wake cores receive the voltage set in bios. It's better to focus on the wattage/current the core is using when at idle. There is only a very little difference between manual and adaptive in the resting state.


Enable EIST if you want your core voltages to lower with load.


----------



## Jpmboy

GeneO said:


> Enable EIST if you want your core voltages to lower with load.


lol, not when using manual override. EIST affects the clock (multiplier bin drops), not the voltage. Adaptive or offset vcore affect voltage.


----------



## l Nuke l

I wish dram temp was an option when setting up q-fan in bios. :/ Would've loved if my dimm.2 fan scaled with ram temps. maybe asus will implement this.


----------



## GeneO

Jpmboy said:


> lol, not when using manual override. EIST affects the clock (multiplier bin drops), not the voltage. Adaptive or offset vcore affect voltage.


Don't know how I missed that "fixed vcore"....


----------



## Jpmboy

l Nuke l said:


> I wish dram temp was an option when setting up q-fan in bios. :/ Would've loved if my dimm.2 fan scaled with ram temps. maybe asus will implement this.


yeah, that would be a nice feature, (not all dimm sticks report temperature tho). There is a temp header on the riser card, you could shove a thermocouple in the stick's heat spreader.


----------



## apw63

Motherboard MXF
CPU 8700K OC 5.0ghz

If I set my adaptive additional turbo voltage to 1.4v in the bios. But when under load benching (prime95 no avx instructions) HWinfo reports vcore as 1.360v. Is this a vdroop of 0.04v? I’m I having a misunderstanding of what vdroop is? I have LLC set to 5. Should there be this much difference? My core VID reports at 1.399v.


----------



## scracy

apw63 said:


> Motherboard MXF
> CPU 8700K OC 5.0ghz
> 
> If I set my adaptive additional turbo voltage to 1.4v in the bios. But when under load benching (prime95 no avx instructions) HWinfo reports vcore as 1.360v. Is this a vdroop of 0.04v? I’m I having a misunderstanding of what vdroop is? I have LLC set to 5. Should there be this much difference? My core VID reports at 1.399v.


Yes, Vdroop 0.04V is normal for LLC 5, Vdroop is there to prevent voltage over shoot under load, its better to set a higher Vcore if required for stability and let Vdroop do its thing than set a lower Vcore with a higher LLC and rely on LLC to increase voltage to get stability  Which UEFI version are you using? I have the same board as yours, I set 1.39V in UEFI 1003 LLC 5 to get 1.376V under load for 5.2Ghz OCCT stable, previous versions of UEFI had completely broken adaptive voltage which may be why your Vdroop is so much relative to mine.


----------



## Silent Scone

kevindd992002 said:


> I couldn't agree more. Raja, as a representative, sucks big time. He should not be called a rep, if it was to me. With this kind of support from Asus, I would be thinking twice of getting an Asus board in the future too. What a PITA!


I must have missed some context here, don't understand why you're throwing insults around? Is this all based on your question regarding the VRM? Is there a problem with the board?


----------



## apw63

scracy said:


> Yes, Vdroop 0.04V is normal for LLC 5, Vdroop is there to prevent voltage over shoot under load, its better to set a higher Vcore if required for stability and let Vdroop do its thing than set a lower Vcore with a higher LLC and rely on LLC to increase voltage to get stability  Which UEFI version are you using? I have the same board as yours, I set 1.39V in UEFI 1003 LLC 5 to get 1.376V under load for 5.2Ghz OCCT stable, previous versions of UEFI had completely broken adaptive voltage which may be why your Vdroop is so much relative to mine.



I'm running UEFI 1003. I have not tried for 5.1ghz yet. When I get 5.0 to where I feel its stable. I will play around with 5.1.

Thank you for the info.

I ran a short test this morning. The vcore bounces back and forth from 1.36v and 1.376v. It tends to stay more on 1.36v


----------



## scracy

apw63 said:


> I'm running UEFI 1003. I have not tried for 5.1ghz yet. When I get 5.0 to where I feel its stable. I will play around with 5.1.
> 
> Thank you for the info.
> 
> I ran a short test this morning. The vcore bounces back and forth from 1.36v and 1.376v. It tends to stay more on 1.36v


Regardless of which software you use to measure Vcore it will always report back in 16mV steps but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is actually 16mV higher or lower it might only be 5mV for example


----------



## Jpmboy

OP updated with OC guides and Intel's 8th gen datasheet (specifications pdf). :thumb:


----------



## apw63

scracy said:


> Regardless of which software you use to measure Vcore it will always report back in 16mV steps but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is actually 16mV higher or lower it might only be 5mV for example


One more question. I have read lots of claims about what the highest safe 24/7 vcore is. Generally agreed upon level seems to be ~1.4v. If I set the vcore in the UEFI to 1.44v with LLC 5. Vdroop will drop vcore to 1.4? That would keep my vcore with in the ~1.4v range? The highest safe VID is a different subject.


----------



## Jpmboy

apw63 said:


> One more question. I have read lots of claims about what the highest safe 24/7 vcore is. Generally agreed upon level seems to be ~1.4v. If I set the vcore in the UEFI to 1.44v with LLC 5. Vdroop will drop vcore to 1.4? That would keep my vcore with in the ~1.4v range? The highest safe VID is a different subject.


read the guides etc in the OP (post #1)


----------



## l Nuke l

Jpmboy said:


> OP updated with OC guides and Intel's 8th gen datasheet (specifications pdf). :thumb:


Dude awesome job! Thanks for your contribution! U are appreciated.


----------



## Jpmboy

l Nuke l said:


> Dude awesome job! Thanks for your contribution! U are appreciated.


Thanks bud. and I apologize for the lack of polish on the basic guide I put together. Had to move on to a different "task"... I'll clean it up in time.


----------



## l Nuke l

Jpmboy said:


> Thanks bud. and I apologize for the lack of polish on the basic guide I put together. Had to move on to a different "task"... I'll clean it up in time.


Looks good to me. Alot of people are going to benefit from it. My buddy just got a Z370 hero and 8700k so ill be linking him your guide. Couldn't have came at a better time.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> read the guides etc in the OP (post #1)


Read your guide, you do have a better CPU than mine..
For all defaults (which is 4.7Ghz after clear cmos and save stock BIOS settings) it pulls 1.296v max, after setting manual voltages with LLC 5 it drops to 1.280v.

I can go a little lower for Realbench stability, not for OCCT small data set though.
But like you said everyone has their own opinion of stability.

I do think my wall is 4.9Ghz, 4.8Ghz requires a extra 10mv (1.3v OCCT Small data set), but then 4.9Ghz needs a least 1.344v for OCCT stability, 5Ghz is 1.420v for OCCT.
The old girl isn't going to win any awards here, but at least the temps are good..


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> Read your guide, you do have a better CPU than mine..
> For all defaults (which is 4.7Ghz after clear cmos and save stock BIOS settings) it pulls 1.296v max, after setting manual voltages with LLC 5 it drops to 1.280v.
> 
> I can go a little lower for Realbench stability, not for OCCT small data set though.
> But like you said everyone has their own opinion of stability.
> 
> I do think my wall is 4.9Ghz, 4.8Ghz requires a extra 10mv (1.3v OCCT Small data set), but then 4.9Ghz needs a least 1.344v for OCCT stability, 5Ghz is 1.420v for OCCT.
> The old girl isn't going to win any awards here, but at least the temps are good..


One's luck is tested when opening the INtel box for sure. I have some dogs in my closet too. I would note that down volt scaling rarely predicts the OC ceiling. That said, and you may have seen me post thins before, the stability regime we use can be more impactfull on the OC ceiling 
than the silicon itself. I assume you are using AVX offset to permit a higher non AVX (eg, non-OCCT) frequency?


----------



## l Nuke l

schoolofmonkey said:


> Read your guide, you do have a better CPU than mine..
> For all defaults (which is 4.7Ghz after clear cmos and save stock BIOS settings) it pulls 1.296v max, after setting manual voltages with LLC 5 it drops to 1.280v.
> 
> I can go a little lower for Realbench stability, not for OCCT small data set though.
> But like you said everyone has their own opinion of stability.
> 
> I do think my wall is 4.9Ghz, 4.8Ghz requires a extra 10mv (1.3v OCCT Small data set), but then 4.9Ghz needs a least 1.344v for OCCT stability, 5Ghz is 1.420v for OCCT.
> The old girl isn't going to win any awards here, but at least the temps are good..


What do you do with your pc? The heaviest load my rig sees is with gaming. realbench was enough for me to determine stability. I tested cpu OC with realbench, cache OC with aida64, and ram with gsat + HCI memtest. Running 5.1ghz no avx offset @ 1.365vcore, cache @ 4.8 and ram @ 4266mhz cl17-18-18-38-328-1t. Been gaming heavy the past 2-3 weeks, playing PUBG, witcher 3, and fallout 4 at 1440p maxed out and no issues. no crashes, no bsod's, no freezes, nothing. So for me realbench, aida64, gsat, and hci memtest is enough for the load I put on my cpu. Also gpu OC core @ 2062-2050mhz and mem @ 12,354.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> I assume you are using AVX offset to permit a higher non AVX (eg, non-OCCT) frequency?


Not for 4.9 or 5Ghz, anything higher I do, but I didn't really need anything higher...lol
I did figure out some of my previous stability problems, I was borrowing some settings from der8auer's overclocking guide as well as previous knowledge.

Well I applied some of the extra settings from der8auer's guide to your "basic" overclocking guide and it introduced stability problems, namely;
CPU Cache/Core Current Limit: 255.50
Long Duration Package Power Limit: 4095
Package Power Time Window: 127

Other than that it was the same, but with these settings I would fail OCCT in seconds, with them left to Auto I got 35 Minutes out of the Small Data Set at 4.8Ghz (Using 4.7Ghz voltages of 1.296).

Is is using manual overclock, no XMP..



l Nuke l said:


> What do you do with your pc? The heaviest load my rig sees is with gaming. realbench was enough for me to determine stability. I tested cpu OC with realbench, cache OC with aida64, and ram with gsat + HCI memtest. Running 5.1ghz no avx offset @ 1.365vcore, cache @ 4.8 and ram @ 4266mhz cl17-18-18-38-328-1t. Been gaming heavy the past 2-3 weeks, playing PUBG, witcher 3, and fallout 4 at 1440p maxed out and no issues. no crashes, no bsod's, no freezes, nothing. So for me realbench, aida64, gsat, and hci memtest is enough for the load I put on my cpu. Also gpu OC core @ 2062-2050mhz and mem @ 12,354.


Honestly, gaming and everyday use, maybe a bit of OBS and some small video encoding..


----------



## l Nuke l

schoolofmonkey said:


> Not for 4.9 or 5Ghz, anything higher I do, but I didn't really need anything higher...lol
> I did figure out some of my previous stability problems, I was borrowing some settings from der8auer's overclocking guide as well as previous knowledge.
> 
> Well I applied some of the extra settings from der8auer's guide to your "basic" overclocking guide and it introduced stability problems, namely;
> CPU Cache/Core Current Limit: 255.50
> Long Duration Package Power Limit: 4095
> Package Power Time Window: 127
> 
> Other than that it was the same, but with these settings I would fail OCCT in seconds, with them left to Auto I got 35 Minutes out of the Small Data Set at 4.8Ghz (Using 4.7Ghz voltages of 1.296).
> 
> Is is using manual overclock, no XMP..
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, gaming and everyday use, maybe a bit of OBS and some small video encoding..


Then in my opinion, from my experience, realbench and x264 and maybe some hwbot x265 is enough for your needs. I used to test with occt too but for my needs occt stable is no more stable then realbench. for me at least. u know?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

l Nuke l said:


> Then in my opinion, from my experience, realbench and x264 and maybe some hwbot x265 is enough for your needs. I used to test with occt too but for my needs occt stable is no more stable then realbench. for me at least. u know?


Honestly it's the first time using OCCT small data set.
With my 7820x the most I would test with was OCCT Large Data Set, which overall I never had a problem.

Testing with Realbench 2.44/2.56 was hit or miss, a overclock would pass Realbench, but then crash in Divinity 2, if I added another 5mv it was fine.

It just seems over at the 8700k thread everyone is swearing by OCCT Small data set for supreme stability.


----------



## HvacGuru

schoolofmonkey said:


> Honestly it's the first time using OCCT small data set.
> With my 7820x the most I would test with was OCCT Large Data Set, which overall I never had a problem.
> 
> Testing with Realbench 2.44/2.56 was hit or miss, a overclock would pass Realbench, but then crash in Divinity 2, if I added another 5mv it was fine.
> 
> It just seems over at the 8700k thread everyone is swearing by OCCT Small data set for supreme stability.


To pass OCCT Small data set 2 hr i did need to set vcore to 1.37v @ 5.1. Passes 2 hr RB 2.56 at 1.31v? Temps were still under 85 -90c with my cpu(house is 70f) That's the hardest stability test i have done yet lol. CPU cooling is a 110i


----------



## schoolofmonkey

HvacGuru said:


> To pass OCCT Small data set 2 hr i did need to set vcore to 1.37v @ 5.1. Passes 2 hr RB 2.56 at 1.31v? Temps were still under 85 -90c with my cpu(house is 70f) That's the hardest stability test i have done yet lol. CPU cooling is a 110i


Yeah but I have a dog CPU, [email protected] to pass Small Data set..


----------



## Jpmboy

Frankly, it's not good to hammer a _gaming _cpu with OCCT sm data set, or p95 small FFT. Hottest does not = hardest. What trips these processors up in a real world scenario is not repetitive calls to the same instruction set. It's the equivalent of training for a 10K cross country run by doing nothing but 50m wind sprints. Drop these power viruses and you'll have a higher OC that's gaming stable.
If divinity needed 5mV more to run stable.. then just add the 5mV and enjoy!


----------



## Jpmboy

ugh, DP


----------



## ChaosAD

For me the best overall vcore test is 10 passes of x264 V2 stability test. It needs a little more vcore to be stable than RB 2.56,like 0.02v, but if i pass x264 then i m also game and folding stable 24/7. I dont think you ll push your cpu harder than 24/7 folding tbh


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah, after that a folding crash is more likely a bad WU.


----------



## Jpmboy

Wow - I just hooked a HyperX cherry red keyboard to this Z370 rig... gotta say, I am very impressed by this "tenkeyless" keyboard. Smooth as silk! I have a Das Pro and a Ducky on either side of it and the hyperX is really pleasant to use! (no, this is not one of OCN new Ads! ) 
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...455008&cm_re=keyboards-_-23-455-008-_-Product


----------



## Jpmboy

DP - again!


----------



## Scotty99

Hyperx has a really good design team, ive heard nothing but good things about their cloud headsets as well.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> Hyperx has a really good design team, ive heard nothing but good things about their cloud headsets as well.


it seems so. And a quality build of the design too. :thumb:


----------



## l Nuke l

Plan on benchmarking for hwbot this weekend. Just wanna know if you guys are benching on the pre me update bios or post me. Last time i benched was on the 0802 bios. Right now im on 1003. Should i roll back just for the weekend or are the scores similar?


----------



## Jpmboy

l Nuke l said:


> Plan on benchmarking for hwbot this weekend. Just wanna know if you guys are benching on the pre me update bios or post me. Last time i benched was on the 0802 bios. Right now im on 1003. Should i roll back just for the weekend or are the scores similar?


really depends on the benchmark. MOstly using win7??


----------



## l Nuke l

Jpmboy said:


> really depends on the benchmark. MOstly using win7??


Gonna be using mostly 7 and maybe some 10. Gonna bench; cinebench, superpi, xtu, x265, geekbench and 3d mark


----------



## Jpmboy

hard to know at this point. I'd probably flash back (save profiles ot a USB). :thumb:


----------



## l Nuke l

Jpmboy said:


> hard to know at this point. I'd probably flash back (save profiles ot a USB). :thumb:


 yeah sounds good.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> Frankly, it's not good to hammer a _gaming _cpu with OCCT sm data set, or p95 small FFT. Hottest does not = hardest. What trips these processors up in a real world scenario is not repetitive calls to the same instruction set. It's the equivalent of training for a 10K cross country run by doing nothing but 50m wind sprints. Drop these power viruses and you'll have a higher OC that's gaming stable.
> If divinity needed 5mV more to run stable.. then just add the 5mV and enjoy!


Yeah you're right, I never used small data set on any of my x99 or x299 rigs and they were stable even doing a 8 hour x264 bluray encode.
For 5Ghz I can get away with 1.396v (No AVX offset) at best without Small Data set, just Realbench, x265, 264, AIDA64 gaming stable, temps are good, doesn't go over 67c.
I don't have the best overclocker, but I'm not gunning for records too.

You said in your guide about not going over 1.32v though :thumb:



l Nuke l said:


> Plan on benchmarking for hwbot this weekend. Just wanna know if you guys are benching on the pre me update bios or post me. Last time i benched was on the 0802 bios. Right now im on 1003. Should i roll back just for the weekend or are the scores similar?


I found 0802 more stable with my RAM..


----------



## l Nuke l

hwinfo64 fans make sure you download new update. check out what he added! you can now monitor cpu power and current even with svid disabled.


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> Yeah you're right, I never used small data set on any of my x99 or x299 rigs and they were stable even doing a 8 hour x264 bluray encode.
> For 5Ghz I can get away with 1.396v (No AVX offset) at best without Small Data set, just Realbench, x265, 264, AIDA64 gaming stable, temps are good, doesn't go over 67c.
> I don't have the best overclocker, but I'm not gunning for records too.
> *You said in your guide about not going over 1.32v though :thumb:*
> I found 0802 more stable with my RAM..


as a basic recommendation (general-use-safe). the sample's leakage is a consideration, and as you saw, I run my 8700K at 1.375 daily, and go above 1.5V "regularly". Many 8700K live above 1.4V, 1.396V is fine especially with the temps you see... besides I don;t see you keeping any CPU for 5+ years anyway!


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> as a basic recommendation (general-use-safe). the sample's leakage is a consideration, and as you saw, I run my 8700K at 1.375 daily, and go above 1.5V "regularly". Many 8700K live above 1.4V, 1.396V is fine especially with the temps you see... besides I don;t see you keeping any CPU for 5+ years anyway!


Ah man you know me by now... lol.
Probably won't be on the next HEDT now we've got 6 and hopefully soon 8 core consumer CPU's, but I know I won't be able to help myself playing with the next chipset.

Just did a 4 hour OCCT Large data set run with [email protected] (1.396v idle, 1.280v set in BIOS, LLC 5) , failed at 3 hours an 58 minutes, so I just added a extra 5mv (1.385v BIOS), I know that will be stable.
The whole run at never went over 67c, fans even on Turbo never went over 50%.


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ QED. A 5.0 8700K is just really smooth and quick.


----------



## chibi

Monkey, you and I must have CPU's from the same mother. I too have the same exact OC on my 8700K and it won't budge a step higher even at 1.45V haha. Definitely not a silicon lottery winner, but it'll do


----------



## KedarWolf

I've got some good news and some bad news.

Intel has approved my RMA replacement of my 8700k. The first PCI-E lane would only work at 2X in two different motherboards and my placeholder i3 works fine at 16x. 

The bad news, they say they are out of stock and the estimated date they can ship it out is Feb. 28th. 

Hopefully it'll be a good chip and I have a Dr. Delid to delid it already.

BTW, if you see the estimated dates on shipping the Dr. Delid is one or two months down the road according to their website, when I ordered mine they shipped the same day parcel post and only took 3-4 days to get here from Europe to Canada.


----------



## KedarWolf

Not sure why that posted twice.

Actually,

Got a shipping notice tonight from Intel, the RMA 8700k on its way.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Not sure why that posted twice.
> 
> Actually,
> 
> Got a shipping notice tonight from Intel, the RMA 8700k on its way.


Checked the tracking, is coming today!

Calls work, cough, cough, sniffle, in a hoarse voice, "I have a really bad cold and won't be in, should be fine for Monday though, k thanks, bye!"


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> Checked the tracking, is coming today!
> 
> Calls work, cough, cough, sniffle, in a hoarse voice, "I have a really bad cold and won't be in, should be fine for Monday though, k thanks, bye!"


Ha! post back with how it does, the ITP replacements I've had in the past were very good chips!


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> Ha! post back with how it does, the ITP replacements I've had in the past were very good chips!


Yeah, my 5960x RMA could do 4.7GHZ at 1.283v.

The original CPU died on the last month on the warranty.


----------



## fvbarc

new 0607 bios for rog strix z370-f


----------



## Scotty99

fvbarc said:


> new 0607 bios for rog strix z370-f


Where? Site lists 0606 as latest.


----------



## fvbarc

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING/HelpDesk_BIOS/

usa site, or upgrade bios downloading it from web by ez flash


----------



## Scotty99

fvbarc said:


> https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING/HelpDesk_BIOS/
> 
> usa site, or upgrade bios downloading it from web by ez flash


Eh i am on the US site lol (live in minnesota), latest version is 0606.


----------



## chibi

Scotty99 said:


> Eh i am on the US site lol (live in minnesota), latest version is 0606.



Scotty, change the DL link from 0606 -> 0607 :thumb:

http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb..._GAMING/ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING-ASUS-0607.zip


----------



## Scotty99

Im just curious about the release notes.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> Ha! post back with how it does, the ITP replacements I've had in the past were very good chips!


 @Jpmboy Is the absolute best Z370 2x8GB kit the Trident Z 4400MHZ?

I've seen peeps doing well with them.


----------



## l Nuke l

KedarWolf said:


> @Jpmboy Is the absolute best Z370 2x8GB kit the Trident Z 4400MHZ?
> 
> I've seen peeps doing well with them.


I've got em and run 4266 cl17-18-18-38-328-1T 8hour gsat stable but now they got kits that are rated at 4266cl17 @ xmp so I would think those might be better kits. I would scoop them up if they released them in non rgb and as 2x8gb kits.


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> @*Jpmboy* Is the absolute best Z370 2x8GB kit the Trident Z 4400MHZ?
> 
> I've seen peeps doing well with them.


they work well. But, you know something "better" is always on the horizon


l Nuke l said:


> I've got em and run 4266 cl17-18-18-38-328-1T 8hour gsat stable but now they got kits that are rated at 4266cl17 @ xmp so I would think those might be better kits. I would scoop them up if they released them in non rgb and as 2x8gb kits.


Yeah - I had a 4x8GB 4266c17 kit a week ago, RGB and all (ugh). I couldn't say they were better vs the 4400c19 and sent em back. the 4266c17 1.45V, and 4400c19 1.4V kits seem to be the same ICs (only used 2 sticks on this APEX). I really was more interested in how they would do on x299. Didn't do any better than the 2 kits of 2x8GB 3600c15 I've had since launch. But damn, DDR4 prices are ridiculous right now. Never should have sold the spare kits I had.


----------



## KedarWolf

l Nuke l said:


> I've got em and run 4266 cl17-18-18-38-328-1T 8hour gsat stable but now they got kits that are rated at 4266cl17 @ xmp so I would think those might be better kits. I would scoop them up if they released them in non rgb and as 2x8gb kits.


My new 8700k has an E batch number I've never seen before and preliminary testing I'm doing 5.1 CPU, 4.9 cache at 1.34v RealBench stable!!

Can't push higher until I redo my delid, I messed it up, need to get some acetol nail polish remover to remove the Krazy Glue and redo it properly.


----------



## dbq5anlxj

Jpmboy said:


> they work well. But, you know something "better" is always on the horizon
> 
> Yeah - I had a 4x8GB 4266c17 kit a week ago, RGB and all (ugh). I couldn't say they were better vs the 4400c19 and sent em back. the 4266c17 1.45V, and 4400c19 1.4V kits seem to be the same ICs (only used 2 sticks on this APEX). I really was more interested in how they would do on x299. Didn't do any better than the 2 kits of 2x8GB 3600c15 I've had since launch. But damn, DDR4 prices are ridiculous right now. Never should have sold the spare kits I had.


Did you manage to push for higher clock or lower latency with the 4266 cl 17 kit compare with the 4400cl19 ? thanks I have the 4266cl19 and 4400cl19 the best I can do is 4266 17-18-18-38-1t. I can do 4300 with the 4266cl19 kit and it can pass two hour memtest but some time it won't fire up after reboot the pc.


----------



## Jpmboy

dbq5anlxj said:


> Did you manage to push for higher clock or lower latency with the 4266 cl 17 kit compare with the 4400cl19 ? thanks I have the 4266cl19 and 4400cl19 the best I can do is 4266 17-18-18-38-1t. I can do 4300 with the 4266cl19 kit and it can pass two hour memtest but some time it *won't fire up after reboot the pc*.


4400+ but not GSAT stable. both the 4400 and 4266 did 4000c12 (for benchmarks). I really don't run higher than 4266c17 on the 4400c19 kit - too much VSA is needed. The boot issue is likely VSA (system agent) The IMC may just need a little help. And/or you can try booting vdram higher and then set Eventual VDIMM to the value you are currently using. Both are worth a try.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> My new 8700k has an E batch number I've never seen before and preliminary testing I'm doing 5.1 CPU, 4.9 cache at 1.34v RealBench stable!!
> 
> Can't push higher until I redo my delid, I messed it up, need to get some acetol nail polish remover to remove the Krazy Glue and redo it properly.


Sounds like you got a winner! Do you mind telling what went wrong with your delid? I haven't done mine yet so am interested in any advice. Thx.


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Sounds like you got a winner! Do you mind telling what went wrong with your delid? I haven't done mine yet so am interested in any advice. Thx.


When I clamped it down in the Dr. Delid one side didn't set and was a bit raised up from the base.


----------



## Flisker_new

Hey guys,

anyone here tested RAID 0 with NVMe drives on Asus Maximus X Apex ? I'm considering buying this board and would love to know if it even works via the DIMM.2 slot and if so, how's the performance.

Thanks in advance


----------



## scracy

Flisker_new said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> anyone here tested RAID 0 with NVMe drives on Asus Maximus X Apex ? I'm considering buying this board and would love to know if it even works via the DIMM.2 slot and if so, how's the performance.
> 
> Thanks in advance


Im running 2x Samsung 960 Pro in Raid 0 on Maximus X Formula performance is good but realistically in real world applications you really wont notice much if any difference going to Raid 0, there is no reason why it wouldnt work on the Apex via the DIMM.2 slots, at the end of the day DMI 3.0 is going to be the bottleneck, screenshot was done on Maximus VIII Formula but performance is the same


----------



## Jpmboy

Flisker_new said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> anyone here tested RAID 0 with NVMe drives on Asus Maximus X Apex ? I'm considering buying this board and would love to know if it even works via the DIMM.2 slot and if so, how's the performance.
> 
> Thanks in advance


works fine. I have nvme raid 0 DIMM.2 on the IX Apex and the X Apex. But honestly, you'll not feel any difference vs a 960 Pro or 900p. 2 disk raid 0 is kinda becoming obsolete with the high quality drives available today. Sure, a disk bench can show a difference, but nothing else really will.


----------



## Flisker_new

Jpmboy said:


> works fine. I have nvme raid 0 DIMM.2 on the IX Apex and the X Apex. But honestly, you'll not feel any difference vs a 960 Pro or 900p. 2 disk raid 0 is kinda becoming obsolete with the high quality drives available today. Sure, a disk bench can show a difference, but nothing else really will.


I see, thanks for all the info


----------



## Weber

Flisker_new said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> anyone here tested RAID 0 with NVMe drives on Asus Maximus X Apex ? I'm considering buying this board and would love to know if it even works via the DIMM.2 slot and if so, how's the performance.
> 
> Thanks in advance


Yes it works. Set them to raid on the pch storage, boot menu disable CSM, save / restart, bios advanced menu, raid should show for setup.


----------



## SpeedyIV

kevindd992002 said:


> I couldn't agree more. Raja, as a representative, sucks big time. He should not be called a rep, if it was to me. With this kind of support from Asus, I would be thinking twice of getting an Asus board in the future too. What a PITA!





Silent Scone said:


> I must have missed some context here, don't understand why you're throwing insults around? Is this all based on your question regarding the VRM? Is there a problem with the board?


Yeah - I think its a bit strong to say Raja sucks big time. I have personally never met the man but I have enjoyed reading his OC guides and his often quite insightful and informed posts. I don't know what the deal is with with VRM temp reporting on the Maximus X Hero boards, but if Asus changed a component and dropped VRM temp monitoring on these boards, I don't blame Raja for it. And if they told him to keep quiet and keep out of it, then I don't blame him for not responding to posts about it. I don't expect him to jeopardize his job to answer my question. In my mind, the issue is with Asus as a company. Luckily, I have never had to go through an RMA exchange or warranty issue with them, though I have read plenty of horror stories. They are a big company, and they are not known for great customer service. 

That said, Asus has crapped out a huge number of new boards this past year, on several different platforms. With all of these products rushed to market, its not surprising that things like this happen. I just wish they would own up to it or otherwise clarify the situation so we are not left guessing. The posts about the mysterious disappearing VRM temps have died down, though I did just see one on the AIDA forum from a guy who is able to read VRM temps on a brand new Maximus X Hero (not wifi) in AIDA64 (but not in BIOS). Maybe he got a board with the original component, maybe there is a mix of versions in active distribution stock. Maybe he lives on a Ley Line. Who knows?!?

As for my VRM temps, I managed to cram 2 temperature probes down under my VRM heat sink and the values they are reporting seem reasonable. I really have no way of gauging their accuracy, but for my OC goals, on Z370, its good enough. Time to move on, with a mental note about what apparently happened, and how Asus evidently chose not to admit it. Would I buy another Asus motherboard? Yes.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Any OSX High Sierra users have motherboard WiFi working on their Maximus board?


----------



## scracy

SpeedyIV said:


> Yeah - I think its a bit strong to say Raja sucks big time. I have personally never met the man but I have enjoyed reading his OC guides and his often quite insightful and informed posts. I don't know what the deal is with with VRM temp reporting on the Maximus X Hero boards, but if Asus changed a component and dropped VRM temp monitoring on these boards, I don't blame Raja for it. And if they told him to keep quiet and keep out of it, then I don't blame him for not responding to posts about it. I don't expect him to jeopardize his job to answer my question. In my mind, the issue is with Asus as a company. Luckily, I have never had to go through an RMA exchange or warranty issue with them, though I have read plenty of horror stories. They are a big company, and they are not known for great customer service.
> 
> That said, Asus has crapped out a huge number of new boards this past year, on several different platforms. With all of these products rushed to market, its not surprising that things like this happen. I just wish they would own up to it or otherwise clarify the situation so we are not left guessing. The posts about the mysterious disappearing VRM temps have died down, though I did just see one on the AIDA forum from a guy who is able to read VRM temps on a brand new Maximus X Hero (not wifi) in AIDA64 (but not in BIOS). Maybe he got a board with the original component, maybe there is a mix of versions in active distribution stock. Maybe he lives on a Ley Line. Who knows?!?
> 
> As for my VRM temps, I managed to cram 2 temperature probes down under my VRM heat sink and the values they are reporting seem reasonable. I really have no way of gauging their accuracy, but for my OC goals, on Z370, its good enough. Time to move on, with a mental note about what apparently happened, and how Asus evidently chose not to admit it. Would I buy another Asus motherboard? Yes.


Whilst I agree with what you are saying regarding Raja in that he probably has been instructed to not say anything regarding the missing VRM temperature sensors it would be nice if Asus would make some sort of official statement regarding this so that we as their customers know where we stand instead of being kept in the dark, but having said that a lot of potential RMA's would cost them a lot of money, as it stands the lack of transparency will likely cost them their reputation and lost loyal and future customers.


----------



## chonk

Hi, I just build new PC with 8700K and Asus Maximus X Hero. I'm using NZXT Kraken X62 AIO cooler. I installed cooler as how they describe on their booklet.
When I boot to windows and open CAM software, I see that CPU temp is 34-40 with idle and 40-70 on load.

When I go to BIOS and check temps, it always saying 11C. Never goes up to 12, never went down to 10. Always shows 11C.
There is no way that it can be 11C since room ambient is 26C.

Screenshot: http://prntscr.com/ib3u2a

What could be the problem? I updated BIOS, I updated firmwares.
Radiator fans are connected to pump's splitter. Pump's 3 pin connector connected to CPU_FAN header.
I setup everything before on MSI board and it was all working with BIOS.

Now BIOS shows 11C and it never go up and down no matter how load is.
Is there a common thing or my board have problems?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

chonk said:


> Hi, I just build new PC with 8700K and Asus Maximus X Hero. I'm using NZXT Kraken X62 AIO cooler. I installed cooler as how they describe on their booklet.
> When I boot to windows and open CAM software, I see that CPU temp is 34-40 with idle and 40-70 on load.
> 
> When I go to BIOS and check temps, it always saying 11C. Never goes up to 12, never went down to 10. Always shows 11C.
> There is no way that it can be 11C since room ambient is 26C.
> 
> Screenshot: http://prntscr.com/ib3u2a
> 
> What could be the problem? I updated BIOS, I updated firmwares.
> Radiator fans are connected to pump's splitter. Pump's 3 pin connector connected to CPU_FAN header.
> I setup everything before on MSI board and it was all working with BIOS.
> 
> Now BIOS shows 11C and it never go up and down no matter how load is.
> Is there a common thing or my board have problems?



Check this section of HWinfo64


----------



## feznz

Hi guys a bit late to this thread I only just came across it 

But I do have a question regarding the Apex and the mid board custom light bar(not the 1 below the CPU) I cannot for the life of me work out how to turn the light on or is it actually faulty? I presume it could be a setting in bios that I couldn't find or a setting in the Aura program.
I tried installing the A.I suite to see if I need that to activate it but for some reason it fails to install.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

feznz said:


> Hi guys a bit late to this thread I only just came across it
> 
> But I do have a question regarding the Apex and the mid board custom light bar(not the 1 below the CPU) I cannot for the life of me work out how to turn the light on or is it actually faulty? I presume it could be a setting in bios that I couldn't find or a setting in the Aura program.
> I tried installing the A.I suite to see if I need that to activate it but for some reason it fails to install.


Ah I had the same question when I first fired up the Apex.

There's a jumper on the board to turn it on.


----------



## feznz

^^^Thanks +1 if a could so lets just pretend for now :thumb:


----------



## ROKUGAN

Jpmboy said:


> OP updated with OC guides and Intel's 8th gen datasheet (specifications pdf). :thumb:


Very nice! 

One thing that surprises me is how much better the memory controller has become.
I´m running my 8700K @ 5.2Ghz / 5Ghz Cache 1.39v with 64GB (4x16) 3600Mhz Trident Z RAM on a Maximus X Hero.
Initially I set my VCCIO / VCSA voltages @ 1.20-1.25 as with my 6700K/7700K.

I stumbled on this post https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?98041-Understanding-and-using-XMP 
Decided to give a try setting those VCCIO / VCSA voltages to 1.0 and to my surprise it´s perfectly stable.
Pretty amazing considering XMP sets them over 1.30 by defect.


----------



## Jpmboy

ROKUGAN said:


> Very nice!
> 
> One thing that surprises me is how much better the memory controller has become.
> I´m running my 8700K @ 5.2Ghz / 5Ghz Cache 1.39v with 64GB (4x16) 3600Mhz Trident Z RAM on a Maximus X Hero.
> Initially I set my VCCIO / VCSA voltages @ 1.20-1.25 as with my 6700K/7700K.
> 
> I stumbled on this post https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?98041-Understanding-and-using-XMP
> Decided to give a try setting those VCCIO / VCSA voltages to 1.0 and to my surprise it´s perfectly stable.
> Pretty amazing considering XMP sets them over 1.30 by defect.


yep - that's our buddy Praz!


----------



## kevindd992002

Silent Scone said:


> I must have missed some context here, don't understand why you're throwing insults around? Is this all based on your question regarding the VRM? Is there a problem with the board?


Sorry, I missed your post. This is my first time attacking Raja and it's not so much about my question about the VRM. It's how people in this thread keep asking Raja regarding how "some" Z370 boards have no VRM temp sensors and he keeps ignoring them. I don't understand the reason as to why you need to ignore such questions if you're to be called an ASUS rep. It could be that he was directed not to answer the question by his superiors but then he could've just told us that directly instead of obviously ignoring the questions.


----------



## Jpmboy

ROKUGAN said:


> Very nice!
> 
> One thing that surprises me is how much better the memory controller has become.
> I´m running my 8700K @ 5.2Ghz / 5Ghz Cache 1.39v with 64GB (4x16) 3600Mhz Trident Z RAM on a Maximus X Hero.
> Initially I set my VCCIO / VCSA voltages @ 1.20-1.25 as with my 6700K/7700K.
> 
> I stumbled on this post https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?98041-Understanding-and-using-XMP
> Decided to give a try setting those VCCIO / VCSA voltages to 1.0 and to my surprise it´s perfectly stable.
> Pretty amazing considering XMP sets them over 1.30 by defect.


I did forget to say that VSA and VCCIO scale with frequency, so for 3600, 1.0V is very reasonable. It's when you get up in the 4000+ range the behavior seems to change. It may actually be stable if it can boot up, Q-code 55 is commonly seen in that frequency range when vsa is low.


----------



## [email protected]

Test builds for applying negative offset to adaptive voltage (issue was due to negative offset also needing to be set for the ring domain - some Intel rule changes over previous gen, I suspect):

Maximus X Hero: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nlxq40058uyU2NL4RWx5MPcC-C8HkZ94/view?usp=sharing

Maximus X Hero WiFi: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AUrs5tu61_ixCgMGT9a4EEhLGztfgZRw/view?usp=sharing

Maximus X Formula: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oxDJEk013raeN4BYA9T2wkpZh4c2ppvm/view?usp=sharing

Maximus X Code: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yRGpk1khlkef7I-48ciXThvzI2kfLh3x/view?usp=sharing

Maximus X Apex: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nN7LZ0VW--O7lTRHHvoNS_fV9da_2p-3/view?usp=sharing

Have requested more builds for more boards.


----------



## SpeedyIV

scracy said:


> Whilst I agree with what you are saying regarding Raja in that he probably has been instructed to not say anything regarding the missing VRM temperature sensors it would be nice if Asus would make some sort of official statement regarding this so that we as their customers know where we stand instead of being kept in the dark, but having said that a lot of potential RMA's would cost them a lot of money, as it stands the lack of transparency will likely cost them their reputation and lost loyal and future customers.


Well I don't know if Asus will get a lot of RMAs because of a disappearing VRM temp reading on a Z370 board. I thought about it but it's a pain to pull a MOBO and RMA it. Especially since there is a better than even chance that a replacement board will be from newer stock, which apparently does not have VRM temp sensor available. From the posts I read, there are some agitated people, and everyone who has stated an opinion agrees that the best thing Asus could do is issue a statement about the issue. Personally, I am ready to move on. With my 2 temp sensors stuck under the VRM heatsink I at least have some sort of ability to monitor temps there. What they (apparently) did is ashame but perhaps understandable. How they handled it is the real disappointment and won't be forgotten, at least by me. I will still by their products when I feel they have the best offering, but I will be taking detailed specs with a grain of salt. There is probably a disclaimer somewhere in microprint that says "Specs subject to change without notice" or similar. It is what it is...


----------



## Jpmboy

[email protected] said:


> Test builds for applying negative offset to adaptive voltage (issue was due to negative offset also needing to be set for the ring domain - some Intel rule changes over previous gen, I suspect):
> 
> Maximus X Hero: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nlxq40058uyU2NL4RWx5MPcC-C8HkZ94/view?usp=sharing
> Maximus X Hero WiFi: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AUrs5tu61_ixCgMGT9a4EEhLGztfgZRw/view?usp=sharing
> Maximus X Formula: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oxDJEk013raeN4BYA9T2wkpZh4c2ppvm/view?usp=sharing
> Maximus X Code: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yRGpk1khlkef7I-48ciXThvzI2kfLh3x/view?usp=sharing
> Maximus X Apex: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nN7LZ0VW--O7lTRHHvoNS_fV9da_2p-3/view?usp=sharing
> Have requested more builds for more boards.


Nice. should be able to run adaptive below VID with these! :specool:


----------



## SpeedyIV

Scotty99 said:


> Id rather be at the mercy of finding an offset than having to send more volts to my cpu than needed with adaptive, just sayin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im just annoyed at the lack of communication by asus on this one, everyone in this thread assumed you could lower adaptive voltage by using a negative offset and that is how people have been giving and receiving advice the entire thread. Now we have new info stating you cannot lower adaptive voltage with an offset, even tho the option is still there in all version of z370 bios.





Scotty99 said:


> I know people are probably sick of hearing about this from me but, on my strix-f it is literally impossible to drop my voltage with adaptive. People have claimed in this thread they have had success using a negative offset in tandem with adaptive to achieve this, on my board it does nothing. I can get full load voltage to drop to where i want it (~1.265-1.280) by adjust llc levels, but i cannot get rid of the high voltages when gaming (1.312-1.328). SVID is taking over so much you dont even need to enter a voltage in the additional turbo adaptive field, for 4.8ghz it will set the same voltage if i leave it blank, put 1.265, put .01 etc, it will load into windows at 1.296v with spikes to 1.328. If i try and do a negative offset (for example 1.296 in adaptive mod box, and .025 in negative offset mode) it literally does nothing (despite it changing in total adaptive mode field in bios), it will still spike to 1.328 and the voltage stack does not get affected at any of the turbo mode ranges.
> 
> If anyone has a suggestion on how to get adaptive working properly, it would be mucho appreciado.





Scotty99 said:


> It does have to do with that, the question is why can you not set a negative offset in tandem with adaptive! And you cant disable svid, adaptive offset disappears when you do so.
> 
> Literally only way to overclock on these boards is with manual voltage.





[email protected] said:


> Test builds for applying negative offset to adaptive voltage (issue was due to negative offset also needing to be set for the ring domain - some Intel rule changes over previous gen, I suspect):
> 
> Have requested more builds for more boards.


Does this address the issue Scotty99 posted about several times, claiming that setting a negative offset in Adaptive seemed to do nothing? IIRC, he finally ended up ordering as Asrock MOBO... Either way, curious if this problem has now been acknowledged and if this BIOS release is supposed to fix this particular issue. Thanks in advance for clarification as I don't want to update my BIOS unless there is a good reason, and this is a good reason.


----------



## KedarWolf

Ugh!! New website format!!! Why can't I upload more than one picture at a time and only as attachments, I need to add a dozen pictures, manually select one at a time, make the post, copy the URL of the attachment in the post, add the first part of each URL to add a picture one at a time.

It wasn't and shouldn't be this complicated.

I think I'm going to leave overclock.net for a more user-friendly forum and move the threads I own there, this is unacceptable. 

And there is no option to add attachments and only pictures from URLs in private messages.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Its it just me or does it seems like it has really slowed down around here since the new forum format was released?


----------



## KedarWolf

Figured it out.

4200MHZ Ripjaws 5 CL14 3200



Spoiler







































































































4133MHZ



Spoiler


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf----i7-8700k @5.1/4.9---4266Mhz-C119-20-20-40-2T----1.47v----SA 1.2375v/VCCIO 1.2375----Stressapptest----1 Hour----4x8GB Ripjaws 5 CL14 3200 B-Dies


































BIOS Settings In Spoiler



Spoiler




























































































IMG]https://i.imgur.com/0bOs6Le.png[/IMG]


----------



## feznz

Nice work there Kedarwolf you making me kinda wish I got a 8700k


----------



## [email protected]

[email protected] said:


> Test builds for applying negative offset to adaptive voltage (issue was due to negative offset also needing to be set for the ring domain - some Intel rule changes over previous gen, I suspect):
> 
> Maximus X Hero: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nlxq40058uyU2NL4RWx5MPcC-C8HkZ94/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Maximus X Hero WiFi: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AUrs5tu61_ixCgMGT9a4EEhLGztfgZRw/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Maximus X Formula: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oxDJEk013raeN4BYA9T2wkpZh4c2ppvm/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Maximus X Code: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yRGpk1khlkef7I-48ciXThvzI2kfLh3x/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Maximus X Apex: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nN7LZ0VW--O7lTRHHvoNS_fV9da_2p-3/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Have requested more builds for more boards.



Strix Z370-G: https://drive.google.com/file/d/13qZvIYwwVrEIGZO7uvsaQgqJnEWIDtWr/view?usp=sharing

Strix Z370-F: https://drive.google.com/file/d/15qB3IOl7UFrjqQ3zHqEJfbHxYl4rQyIk/view?usp=sharing

Strix Z370-E: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HjyHpTbE8ktucIAeTCVK7I2TuXGioJlk/view?usp=sharing


----------



## ViTosS

I managed to finally use adaptive mode on my 5.0Ghz OC, 1.296v idle and 1.264v full load through RealBench, using LLC 3, AC/DC Loadline to 0.01 and SVID to Best Case Scenario, the only problem is when web browsing/watching Youtube videos I have some spikes to 1.344v that doesn't occur while stress testing, and this is hapenning only at adaptive mode, with manual mode I have the same OC but LLC 5 instead of 3 and all the time I'm at 1.296v idle and 1.264v at any load (stress test, browsing, gaming, etc).

Also another thing, I did OC my RAM from 3000Mhz CL15 to 3600Mhz CL18, I just copied the 3600Mhz Corsair RAM timings and set 18/19/19/39 also changed VCCIO and VCSAA to 1.25v and DRAM voltage to 1.40v, but my reboots and boots are taking forever, my Q-Code LED takes a lot of time showing the yellow light (which means RAM) showing the number 61, it takes a lot of time but eventually will boot without problem, any idea why of that?

Sorry my bad english, I apreciate any help!

Edit.: Well, I tried 1.42, 1.44, 1.47v for RAM and raised the VCCIO VCSAA to 1.30v and the same timings but playing AC Origins my PC just reboots without BSOD, so what am I mistaking here? My RAM is so bad that can't do CL18 3600Mhz even with so high voltages?


----------



## reset1101

ViTosS said:


> Also another thing, I did OC my RAM from 3000Mhz CL15 to 3600Mhz CL18, I just copied the 3600Mhz Corsair RAM timings and set 18/19/19/39 also changed VCCIO and VCSAA to 1.25v and DRAM voltage to 1.40v, but my reboots and boots are taking forever, my Q-Code LED takes a lot of time showing the yellow light (which means RAM) showing the number 61, it takes a lot of time but eventually will boot without problem, any idea why of that?
> 
> Sorry my bad english, I apreciate any help!
> 
> Edit.: Well, I tried 1.42, 1.44, 1.47v for RAM and raised the VCCIO VCSAA to 1.30v and the same timings but playing AC Origins my PC just reboots without BSOD, so what am I mistaking here? My RAM is so bad that can't do CL18 3600Mhz even with so high voltages?


Ive had those behaviours when RAM is unstable. Try lowering the speed, say to 3500Mhz, and see what happens. You are applying a good OC to your RAM, so it might not be stable at those speeds and timmings, even increasing the voltages as you have.


----------



## feznz

ViTosS said:


> I managed to finally use adaptive mode on my 5.0Ghz OC, 1.296v idle and 1.264v full load through RealBench, using LLC 3, AC/DC Loadline to 0.01 and SVID to Best Case Scenario, the only problem is when web browsing/watching Youtube videos I have some spikes to 1.344v that doesn't occur while stress testing, and this is hapenning only at adaptive mode, with manual mode I have the same OC but LLC 5 instead of 3 and all the time I'm at 1.296v idle and 1.264v at any load (stress test, browsing, gaming, etc).
> 
> Also another thing, I did OC my RAM from 3000Mhz CL15 to 3600Mhz CL18, I just copied the 3600Mhz Corsair RAM timings and set 18/19/19/39 also changed VCCIO and VCSAA to 1.25v and DRAM voltage to 1.40v, but my reboots and boots are taking forever, my Q-Code LED takes a lot of time showing the yellow light (which means RAM) showing the number 61, it takes a lot of time but eventually will boot without problem, any idea why of that?
> 
> Sorry my bad english, I apreciate any help!
> 
> Edit.: Well, I tried 1.42, 1.44, 1.47v for RAM and raised the VCCIO VCSAA to 1.30v and the same timings but playing AC Origins my PC just reboots without BSOD, so what am I mistaking here? My RAM is so bad that can't do CL18 3600Mhz even with so high voltages?


Assassin creed origins is will find a in-stability in a OC real fast I have gone through all the basic stability checks and ACO will be the one that will do exactly that boom instant shut down no warning I been playing it about 100 hours and I ended up with 1.36v @ 4.8-4.8-4.7-4.6-4.6-4.6Ghz or gamers profile on the Asus Apex thats about it for 100% solid stable gameplay.
I might add I can easily pass 5Ghz across all 6 cores @ 1.42v for an hour with prime small ffts play ACO same settings boom 3min shutdown.(8600k)
never have I struck this before usually if I can boot into windows @ lets say 5.1 then I could easily get 5Ghz rock solid stable coming from 3770k though (cpu list x2 3770k, 3570k, 2500k, q6600)
personally I would get CPU rock solid with stock ram first, before playing with your ram.

added screen shot.


----------



## [email protected]

ViTosS said:


> I managed to finally use adaptive mode on my 5.0Ghz OC, 1.296v idle and 1.264v full load through RealBench, using LLC 3, AC/DC Loadline to 0.01 and SVID to Best Case Scenario


Just a note: no need to set both SVD to best case and AC/DC load line to 0.01. They both have the same function. So, if you set SVID to best case, you don't need to adjust the AC/DC load line settings because it sets the AC and DC load lines to 0.01.


----------



## GeneO

Thanks for that info Raja. So when you set best case, any changes to the AC/DC load line values are ignored?


----------



## [email protected]

Best case sets both values to 0.01

Whether or not applying other values works as an additive, I do not know. Its not something I've tried as I'd just leave svid behaviour on auto if I wanted to set custom values for the ia ac/dc load lines. Pointless fiddling with both.


----------



## feznz

I was reading through the other day about VRM temps I can say that in bios there is VRM temps showing up not really bothered to try monitor them in windows though


----------



## scracy

feznz said:


> I was reading through the other day about VRM temps I can say that in bios there is VRM temps showing up not really bothered to try monitor them in windows though


On which board?


----------



## feznz

scracy said:


> On which board?


woops should do a basic rig sig but thought that would be patched by now 

Apex


----------



## scracy

feznz said:


> woops should do a basic rig sig but thought that would be patched by now
> 
> Apex


No problem VRM temp appeared in UEFI on Apex previously from what I understand, can anyone confirm whether or not VRM temps are monitored within the new UEFI Raja has just posted for Maximus X Formula?


----------



## feznz

[email protected] said:


> Best case sets both values to 0.01
> .


Hi Raja I just noticed that the settings that are applied in bios are not corresponding with clocks reported in windows. tried with HWifo too didn't like the program uninstalled it but corresponds with HWMonitor.
Just not sure what is going on while under full load the cores all boost to 4.6Ghz but with light to near idle all cores will jump to 4.8 no AVX But the cores are set to 4.8-4.8-4.7-4.6-4.6-4.6 (screen shot provided)
also when CPU is und light load ie under 10% the core clocks are jumping up and down from 800Mhz to 4800Mhz the CPU never really stays at base clock I have tried disabling as many programs in task manager to make the CPU use less than 5% still not really helps.

I didn't try the Bios provided above but did use ver 1003 ApexX with 8600k


----------



## Jpmboy

unless you do (which you can't) a "By Specific Core" OC any/all of the cores will hit 4.8, just not all at 4.8 at the same time... Eg, any 2 cores may hit 4.8, but when all 6 cores are fully loaded, you get 4.6. With no AVX offset, it may run AVX at 4.6 in the config you have in the screen shot... not the per core configuration AFAIK.


----------



## feznz

That would kinda make sense but that would make per core setting useless, you could achieve the same by set OC to 4.8Ghz and have and AVX offset of 2 
Just not sure I think I got a dog of a CPU but the way I was monitoring CPU ratio was CPUZ and had assumed it was just monitoring the lowest core clock.
I am pretty sure this CPU should be capable of 5Ghz, just seems stable with a steady CPU stressing program but with a varied gaming load causes crashes only ACO though.
I been too busy gaming to really worry about a decent OC just a rough and stable but got a lan gaming night coming up and need to execute my epeen


----------



## encrypted11

By far, per core on the Z370 mainstream platform always meant "custom Intel turboboost tables". In otherwords, user modded turboboost 2.0
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000005647/processors.html

You basically get core frequencies turboboost bins by the number of active cores based on the frequency bins set in the BIOS.


----------



## feznz

Ok I understand what is happening now thanks Jmpboy and encrypted11 for clarifying this 
rethink on OC settings probably just got the worst chip in my life

edit 
the best chip but worst OCing chip


----------



## KedarWolf

Update
KedarWolf---i7-8700k @5.1/4.9---4266Mhz-C19-17-17-33-2T---1.47v---SA 1.2375v---VCCIO 1.2375---Stressapptest---1 Hour
G.Skill Ripjaws 5 CL14 3200 B-Dies 4x8GB kit.


























*BIOS Settings In Spoiler*



Spoiler


----------



## feznz

Again nice work there KedarWolf

thinking my best plan of attack would be wait for a few months for the onflow of better chips to come along I got this 8600k on launch.
I have noted that first batches are always the worst until the corrections are made thoughout the production process this can take a few months before the better chips come off the production line.
Thats how I got a 5Ghz 3770k about 12mths after launch so gives me a good excuse for a 8700k mid to late year.


----------



## ViTosS

I really wanted to use adaptive mode to preserve my chip, because it can do 5.0Ghz at 1.264v, but I tried so many settings and I still have vcore jump when web browsing to 1.344v that doesn't happen using manual mode voltage and I don't want that jumps because everyone says that is better to have a lower full load voltage and a higher idle voltage, the problem is that the full load (using stress tests) is lower but web browsing and watching videos there is the jump to 1.344v and that worries me.


----------



## Rowethren

ViTosS said:


> I really wanted to use adaptive mode to preserve my chip, because it can do 5.0Ghz at 1.264v, but I tried so many settings and I still have vcore jump when web browsing to 1.344v that doesn't happen using manual mode voltage and I don't want that jumps because everyone says that is better to have a lower full load voltage and a higher idle voltage, the problem is that the full load (using stress tests) is lower but web browsing and watching videos there is the jump to 1.344v and that worries me.


Have you tried the new beta BIOS Raja posted? Looks like they might fix that problem. I personally just gave up with adaptive and just use offset to undervolt and it works fine now.


----------



## encrypted11

feznz said:


> Ok I understand what is happening now thanks Jmpboy and encrypted11 for clarifying this
> rethink on OC settings probably just got the worst chip in my life
> 
> edit
> the best chip but worst OCing chip


Actually, per core overclocks can be used to maximise frequency yields on ambient cooling. But you'd start with a "sync all core" stable voltage and multiplier then convert the values to per core (And run adaptive if you'd like a full dynamic frequency voltage scaling). The bins of the lower active cores can be increase anywhere from 0-3 ratios with minimal or no vcore bumps.
As an example, I ran my 6700k at 50-49-48-48 (or 49-49-48-47) from the 1 to 4 core ratio stable at its 4.8GHz vCore levels on Adaptive. My 7700K would do something in the vicinity of just 52-51-51-51 (or 51-51-50-50) at 4 core ratio voltages.

They would give you a slight performance boost on light and bursty loads when appropriately used.


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> Ok I understand what is happening now thanks Jmpboy and encrypted11 for clarifying this
> rethink on OC settings probably just got the worst chip in my life
> 
> edit
> the best chip but worst OCing chip


considering it "quick and dirty" the crashes you had may not be the core... unstable ram is fully capable of the same ctd or bsod.


----------



## KedarWolf

*More VCCIO and SA is NOT always better. *

I never got 4266MHZ GSAT stable at 17-17-17-34 2T until I *dropped* from 1.2375v on both to 1.225v. :h34r-smi

Mess around with yours if you're getting GSAT errors.

If it's wrong buying a cheap M.2 to have Linux on only for GSAT I don't want to be right.


----------



## feznz

my method raise voltage to 1.35 and work your way down from 5Ghz sync all cores, lol I ended up at 4.6Ghz then try for some more voltage to stabilize 4.7 at the point of 1.46v still not stable all with stock ram. well not exactly that method but a quick run down.
So a rethink now knowing that 4.6 is the limit across all 6 cores Might try 50-50-48-48-46-46 or with AVX of 2 50-50-50-50-48-48 if I am lucky 


I am not too concerned about ram OC my benching days are over it gets way too expensive to start binning components TBH not too sure if I got B-Dies just nice pretty RGB 3200Mhz running stock bumped a little the other day more for fun.

Thanks again guys for your input.

Just another quick question what is a program I can select to stress 2,4 or 6 cores


----------



## feznz

KedarWolf said:


> *More VCCIO and SA is NOT always better. *
> 
> I never got 4266MHZ GSAT stable at 17-17-17-34 2T until I *dropped* from 1.2375v on both to 1.225v. :h34r-smi
> 
> Mess around with yours if you're getting GSAT errors.
> 
> If it's wrong buying a cheap M.2 to have Linux on only for GSAT I don't want to be right.



Bingo you were right :thumb:

Couldn't pass real bench even @ 4.6 all cores synced changed VCCIO and SA to 1.225 

final semi tuned settings no AVX, 5.0-5.0-5.0-5.0-4.8-4.8 @ 1.29v under load spikes to 1.37v not worried about that 
allcores sync 5.0 failed might try again later but will do when time maybe I might give that ram a crack too


----------



## AlphaZero

Hello all.

I am trying to get my dual-rank G.Skill F4-3200C14D-32GTZR 2x16 kit to run at XMP 14-14-14-34 1T on my Maximus X Code, but so far I have not been able to stabilize them at 1T. I am running the kit at XMP 2T 1.4v, AUTO VCCIO and SA.

Any suggestions? What about overclocking dual-rank beyond G.Skill's XMP profile?

My 8700k is at 5GHz 1.365v, 4.7GHz cache.


----------



## GeneO

AlphaZero said:


> Hello all.
> 
> I am trying to get my dual-rank G.Skill F4-3200C14D-32GTZR 2x16 kit to run at XMP 14-14-14-34 1T on my Maximus X Code, but so far I have not been able to stabilize them at 1T. I am running the kit at XMP 2T 1.4v, AUTO VCCIO and SA.
> 
> Any suggestions? What about overclocking dual-rank beyond G.Skill's XMP profile?
> 
> My 8700k is at 5GHz 1.365v, 4.7GHz cache.


Same mb and memory. 
Couldn't get mine stable at 1T either but haven't pressed it.


----------



## AlphaZero

GeneO said:


> Same mb and memory.
> Couldn't get mine stable at 1T either but haven't pressed it.


I was worried about that. I was previously on a Crosshair VI Hero with Ryzen before getting frustrated and switching platforms. I had to use Gear Down Mode which was a pseudo "1.5T" mode where some things ran 1T latency and others 2T.

Have you tried overclocking beyond the XMP specs?


----------



## Jpmboy

AlphaZero said:


> Hello all.
> 
> I am trying to get my dual-rank G.Skill F4-3200C14D-32GTZR 2x16 kit to run at XMP 14-14-14-34 1T on my Maximus X Code, but so far I have not been able to stabilize them at 1T. I am running the kit at XMP 2T 1.4v, AUTO VCCIO and SA.
> 
> Any suggestions? What about overclocking dual-rank beyond G.Skill's XMP profile?
> 
> My 8700k is at 5GHz 1.365v, 4.7GHz cache.


I would double check the VSA and VCCIO. AUTO may be setting these too high... yes, more VSA is not always better. :thumb:


----------



## GeneO

Jpmboy said:


> I would double check the VSA and VCCIO. AUTO may be setting these too high... yes, more VSA is not always better. :thumb:


Mine is low but no go


----------



## GeneO

AlphaZero said:


> I was worried about that. I was previously on a Crosshair VI Hero with Ryzen before getting frustrated and switching platforms. I had to use Gear Down Mode which was a pseudo "1.5T" mode where some things ran 1T latency and others 2T.
> 
> Have you tried overclocking beyond the XMP specs?


No, not yet. I am still working on OC the CPU.


----------



## Jpmboy

GeneO said:


> No, not yet. I am still working on OC the CPU.


yeah, so if you have the VSA tuned (it is an inverted-U type response curve) best to start over from a clean slate. Best thing to do is clear out all the XMP settings (use CLRCMOS) and enter the XMP primary timings, voltage and frequency manually (assuming the XMP kit is BCLK 100). Some dram dividers are not available on 100 so XMP will change the BCLK.


----------



## feznz

Had another play happy with my results the ram wasn't playing ball hit a wall @ 3500Mhz thought I had permanently corrupted windows getting BSOD on boot on stock settings luckily a system restore fixed the problem  
Pretty sure they are not B-die or just me not good at OC ram upped the voltage to 1.4v and loosen the timings still BSOD before log in @ 3600Mhz, 3500Mhz just couldn't pass Realbench for even 3min.
hit the voltage and thermal wall on CPU not too sure if to delid as I won't be stressing like Realbench I know its only a 15min test but prefer to assess stability with day to day usage 
But for a CPU that I thought was a dud, 5Ghz across all 6 cores @ 1.41V got to be happy just a slight tweak on the ram 3400Mhz from 3200Mhz


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> Had another play happy with my results the ram wasn't playing ball hit a wall @ 3500Mhz thought I had permanently corrupted windows getting BSOD on boot on stock settings luckily a system restore fixed the problem
> Pretty sure they are not B-die or just me not good at OC ram upped the voltage to 1.4v and loosen the timings still BSOD before log in @ 3600Mhz, 3500Mhz just couldn't pass Realbench for even 3min.
> hit the voltage and thermal wall on CPU not too sure if to delid as I won't be stressing like Realbench I know its only a 15min test but prefer to assess stability with day to day usage
> But for a CPU that I thought was a dud, 5Ghz across all 6 cores @ 1.41V got to be happy just a slight tweak on the ram 3400Mhz from 3200Mhz


yep - like I said: http://www.overclock.net/forum/26735393-post1382.html

as for ram, some memory dividers work better than others (3200, 3600 are good on this platform, so are 3866 and 4266 with capable ram). When ram gets fould like that, you really need to clrcmos to flush out any bad timings which resulted from marginal training and start from a clean slate.


----------



## aliquiswe

http://www.overclock.net/forum/26746217-post1667.html
http://www.overclock.net/forum/26746417-post1668.html
http://www.overclock.net/forum/26758465-post1671.html

I get a ****-ton of memory errors on my Corsair 3466 kit which is on the QVL of the Z370-F Strix. I've tried with TWO i7 8700Ks.

It work much better on the MSI Z370 Gaming M5 (though for whatever reason I can get memtest86 to hang there instead.)

Any ideas? How can I change IO and SA voltages? No matter how I press there I can't enter a value. Above it says something about switching of CPU over-voltage regulation or whatever but it doesn't say where or how.

Also after enabling XMP should I answer Yes or No to their vague question? I've always answered no because I know before they turned on MCE by default. But is that even what it does or do it do other useful things or more crazy things?

Answering no there and just turning on XMP set high IO and SA values assuming they are actually functional. Turning off XMP and just setting frequency 3200 MHz make the RAM voltage become 1.50 volt.

Seem like a crazy board overall and the XMP doesn't work anyway. The Gaming M5 is less shiny and may have worse sound though. One more fan header on board .. then again no support for additional fan headers or the mounting kit for a VRM fan. Pro Carbon and Pro Carbon AC is a bit more shiny but that's nothing I have at home.

No idea what to keep and what to use but this suck.


----------



## Jpmboy

aliquiswe said:


> http://www.overclock.net/forum/26746217-post1667.html
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/26746417-post1668.html
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/26758465-post1671.html
> 
> I get a ****-ton of memory errors on my Corsair 3466 kit which is on the QVL of the Z370-F Strix. I've tried with TWO i7 8700Ks.
> 
> It work much better on the MSI Z370 Gaming M5 (though for whatever reason I can get memtest86 to hang there instead.)
> 
> Any ideas? How can I change IO and SA voltages? No matter how I press there I can't enter a value. Above it says something about switching of CPU over-voltage regulation or whatever but it doesn't say where or how.
> 
> Also after enabling XMP should I answer Yes or No to their vague question? I've always answered no because I know before they turned on MCE by default. But is that even what it does or do it do other useful things or more crazy things?
> 
> Answering no there and just turning on XMP set high IO and SA values assuming they are actually functional. Turning off XMP and just setting frequency 3200 MHz make the RAM voltage become 1.50 volt.
> 
> Seem like a crazy board overall and the XMP doesn't work anyway. The Gaming M5 is less shiny and may have worse sound though. One more fan header on board .. then again no support for additional fan headers or the mounting kit for a VRM fan. Pro Carbon and Pro Carbon AC is a bit more shiny but that's nothing I have at home.
> 
> No idea what to keep and what to use but this suck.


first, clrcmos (or load optimized defaults) and get control of those voltages. VSA and VCCIO are very high. then follow the coffeelake OC guide in my sig. once you get that done, post back and we can work on the ram. But daumn, 1.3V vccio? danger will robinson.
you need ot clrcmos to flush ouot any XMP settings you do not see in bios.


----------



## aliquiswe

Jpmboy said:


> first, clrcmos (or load optimized defaults) and get control of those voltages. VSA and VCCIO are very high. then follow the coffeelake OC guide in my sig. once you get that done, post back and we can work on the ram. But daumn, 1.3V vccio? danger will robinson.
> you need ot clrcmos to flush ouot any XMP settings you do not see in bios.


I have had the battery removed and loaded the defaults.
That's the values if show beside "auto" as soon as I enable XMP. It's not values I've chosen. Both boards chose them by themselves.

The battery has been out for over a day before.

I don't know why ASUS is ******ed and throw on high voltages without asking / just because.


----------



## aliquiswe

Jpmboy said:


> first, clrcmos (or load optimized defaults) and get control of those voltages. VSA and VCCIO are very high. then follow the coffeelake OC guide in my sig. once you get that done, post back and we can work on the ram. But daumn, 1.3V vccio? danger will robinson.
> you need ot clrcmos to flush ouot any XMP settings you do not see in bios.


Also I haven't overclocked the CPU whatsoever so if the guide is simply for overclocking that but not RAM then it's not for me as is because my CPU has never been overclocked beyond enabling XMP and also disabling XMP and setting DRAM frequency to 3200 and 3000 to see if that worked instead (and then get 1.5 volt) and 2666 in the end (which got the 1.2 volt.)

I haven't set **** as far as voltage goes. It's just ASUS being ******ed. Maybe MSI too.


----------



## Jpmboy

aliquiswe said:


> I have had the battery removed and loaded the defaults.
> That's the values if show beside "auto" as soon as I enable XMP. It's not values I've chosen. Both boards chose them by themselves.
> 
> The battery has been out for over a day before.
> 
> I don't know why ASUS is ******ed and* throw on high voltages without asking / just because*.





aliquiswe said:


> Also I haven't overclocked the CPU whatsoever so if the guide is simply for overclocking that but not RAM then it's not for me as is because my CPU has never been overclocked beyond enabling XMP and also disabling XMP and setting DRAM frequency to 3200 and 3000 to see if that worked instead (and then get 1.5 volt) and 2666 in the end (which got the 1.2 volt.)
> 
> I haven't set **** as far as voltage goes. It's just ASUS being ******ed. Maybe MSI too.


Yes I know.. it's the XMP programming that sets the voltages, and when the ram frequency is raised "AUTO" scales voltages for the worse case scenario.. not the best case. So... do not enable XMP. XMP is a CPU overclock too.

1) CLRCMOS (use the jumper or button on the back, no need ot pull the battery) Simply disabling XMP DOES NOT CLEAR XMP Programming.
2) after clrcmos, post into bios and and manually enter the ram speed and primary timings, then set the voltage to the voltage the kit is spec'd at (do not activate XMP!). You must set AI overclock tuner to MANUAL.
3) set VSA to 1.225V and VCCIO to 1.2125V manually
4) A ram overclock is a CPU overclock (IMC and cache are affected). The CPU may require a bump in VCORE over stock.

It's best to follow the coffee lake guides in my sig (and in post#1), then we can do ram. After following the guide, your system wil be set up for RAM to be OC'd.


----------



## aliquiswe

Jpmboy said:


> Yes I know.. it's the XMP programming that sets the voltages, and when the ram frequency is raised "AUTO" scales voltages for the worse case scenario.. not the best case. So... do not enable XMP. XMP is a CPU overclock too.
> 
> 1) CLRCMOS (use the jumper or button on the back, no need ot pull the battery) Simply disabling XMP DOES NOT CLEAR XMP Programming.
> 2) after clrcmos, post into bios and and manually enter the ram speed and primary timings, then set the voltage to the voltage the kit is spec'd at (do not activate XMP!). You must set AI overclock tuner to MANUAL.
> 3) set VSA to 1.225V and VCCIO to 1.2125V manually
> 4) A ram overclock is a CPU overclock (IMC and cache are affected). The CPU may require a bump in VCORE over stock.
> 
> It's best to follow the coffee lake guides in my sig (and in post#1), then we can do ram. After following the guide, your system wil be set up for RAM to be OC'd.


Yeah I understand enabling XMP is overclocking and overvoltage of the memory controller and the RAM (arguably since they list those spec but whatever.)

However what I would expect from XMP without actually knowing anything about it is that it simply fetched those 3466, 16-18-18-36, 1.35 volt values and applied that and that that was it. Possibly some minor tweak with timings from some BIOS data file if they learned how to increase support over time.

I don't / didn't expect it to go with some worst case overclocking scenario maybe it was a 2133 MHz module push it all as high as we can because supposedly someone want for us to make this work automatically.

Anyway ...
All I get afterwards is a black screen and nothing, like some attempts to boot again and again or what not, fan spinning up.

So at-least those settings doesn't work. Maybe others do. No idea if those settings would work on the MSI board. No idea if my CPU is in a much worse state now than when I first tried.

I mean. I throw up random screenshot from before too.. Of course it didn't worked back then but 284 errors in 60+ minutes is less than ******* 600 in 2 minutes.

The only thing I've done inbetween that is to have used the MSI Z370 Gaming M5 board for like one day with XMP on. That board however used IO 1.256 and SA 1.312. No idea if those values would work on the ASUS board. No idea if those are safe. No idea if the piss poor results the last time mean the memory controller is now worse or if it was just poor luck.

This is just stupid and as said I kinda haven't had any intention to "overclock" / do anything extreme myself whatsoever. I bought faster RAM because faster RAM supposedly was better and I tested to enable the XMP profile to see if it work and it didn't.

It's all just stupid and a waste of time. Setting changing 0.01 volts all over the place just to have no success anyway and risk the processor seem kinda .. not directed to you or anything but stupid too.
The most stupid in the first place was paying 700 SEK more for the processor and 500 SEK more for the RAM to suffer through this ****. 1200 SEK for absolute nothing except a bunch of blue-screens and hours of work. At best! ..


----------



## feznz

Jpmboy said:


> first, clrcmos (or load optimized defaults) and get control of those voltages. VSA and VCCIO are very high. then follow the coffeelake OC guide in my sig. once you get that done, post back and we can work on the ram. But daumn, 1.3V vccio? danger will robinson.
> you need ot clrcmos to flush ouot any XMP settings you do not see in bios.


Same problem apex defaulting High VCCIO AND SA on auto just a bit rusty on the ocing hadn't done it since IVY

Could do the tuning method to find my SWEET SPOT I am happy with my results I like a nice round 5

I don't know why but I missed that your guide was in the OP and sig :doh: nice read and might work on ram but need to look at a dummy windows install don't want to corrupt it


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> Same problem apex defaulting High VCCIO AND SA on auto just a bit rusty on the ocing hadn't done it since IVY
> 
> Could do the tuning method to find my SWEET SPOT I am happy with my results I like a nice round 5
> 
> I don't know why but I missed that your guide was in the OP and sig :doh: nice read and might work on ram but need to look at a dummy windows install don't want to corrupt it


if the board is setting vsa and vccio high, just lower them to a more reasonable value. 1.25 and 1.22 (respectively) is all most any ram/cpu combo should need.
just make a backup image of your windows install (and do the install at ALL DEFAULTS).


----------



## aliquiswe

Jpmboy said:


> if the board is setting vsa and vccio high, just lower them to a more reasonable value. 1.25 and 1.22 (respectively) is all most any ram/cpu combo should need.
> just make a backup image of your windows install (and do the install at ALL DEFAULTS).


SA 1.25 and IO 1.22?

Should I try something more or forget about it?

I've seen Raja reply before at ASUS forum and spoke about going both up and down in voltage and others talking about an U or something so I assume more isn't necessarily better for compatibility purposes either but we already know the previous high values doesn't work well for me at-least.

I didn't care core voltage anything when I tried before. I don't even know where to do it.

Is default max voltage on stock about 1.25 volt? with XMP it's been upwards 1.35? For shorter times? HWmonitor on a cleared installed listed 1.248 as highest just when fired up at-least. Intel XTU get it close to 1.20. XTU has run at-least 1.30 volt before but on which motherboard and with XMP on or not I don't know. I've run Prime95 some time too.


----------



## chibi

Hey guys, is there a trigger I can set in the bios for my CPU Fan header? If the rpm goes to zero, can the bios force a shutdown while in Windows? Trying to set a backup plan if my pump dies.

System board = Maximus X Apex

Thanks!


----------



## Jpmboy

aliquiswe said:


> SA 1.25 and IO 1.22?
> 
> *Should I try something more or forget about it*?
> 
> I've seen Raja reply before at ASUS forum and spoke about going both up and down in voltage and others talking about an U or something so I assume more isn't necessarily better for compatibility purposes either but we already know the previous high values doesn't work well for me at-least.
> 
> I didn't care core voltage anything when I tried before. I don't even know where to do it.
> 
> Is default max voltage on stock about 1.25 volt? with XMP it's been upwards 1.35? For shorter times? HWmonitor on a cleared installed listed 1.248 as highest just when fired up at-least. Intel XTU get it close to 1.20. XTU has run at-least 1.30 volt before but on which motherboard and with XMP on or not I don't know. I've run Prime95 some time too.


did you try the voltage I suggested? yes, 1.25V VSA. What max voltage on stock? if you mean vcore, AND read the guide, you would know that my chip stock voltage was 1.286V. it's determined by the VID.
It seems to me, based on your post, that you if you do overclock, you need to stick with the basics as shown in my or Sin082's (Steve's) tweaktown guide. I mean, follow the guide and post back with results. otherwise there's not much to do here is there? :blinksmil



chibi said:


> Hey guys, is there a trigger I can set in the bios for my CPU Fan header? If the rpm goes to zero, can the bios force a shutdown while in Windows? Trying to set a backup plan if my pump dies.
> 
> System board = Maximus X Apex
> 
> Thanks!


all you get is a cpu fan warning at start up. if you want that capability (done the right way) run your pump off an aquaero with the ATX jumper cable.


----------



## aliquiswe

Jpmboy said:


> did you try the voltage I suggested? yes, 1.25V VSA. What max voltage on stock? if you mean vcore, AND read the guide, you would know that my chip stock voltage was 1.286V. it's determined by the VID.
> It seems to me, based on your post, that you if you do overclock, you need to stick with the basics as shown in my or Sin082's (Steve's) tweaktown guide. I mean, follow the guide and post back with results. otherwise there's not much to do here is there? :blinksmil


But I didn't bothered about overclocking ALU & FPU performance because it's already 3-6 times faster than the AMD Phenom X4 9850 I had before.

Since I bought the faster RAM I just wanted to enable XMP and be done with it. But that's not how it worked. The reason I haven't followed any overclocking guide is because I haven't had the intention to follow one. I haven't wanted to know what my processor can do as far as clocks and with or without AVX loads go. As such "this is a reasonable voltage and temperature limit now see how far you can go" for instance haven't been relevant because I haven't bothered. All I wanted to do was to run the RAM at that clock and all I assumed from the XMP setting was to have those values entered into BIOS and then for the RAM to kinda work because it was on the QVL without the motherboard doing other stupid things to try to get there. I never changed the vcore. Don't know if the MSI board would be a better start either. Need to send this **** away some days ago up to at-least on Friday if I don't want it and I definitely don't want both. Don't know what I should do and I feel so pressured in time. Has always done. If I sent both back and then got new stuff I would at-least have more time to think about it but I wouldn't get the prices I paid on black friday.

Also I don't have much time to do all that much ****.

It's 01:43 now and 02 + 8 hours of sleep is 10 and one need to leave a post package before 16 to know if leave in time so that's 6 hours which include other stuff like eating breakfast and such, plus removing all computer parts and setting it up again take 1-1.5 hour and if I were to send it back stripping it down once again take even more time. Also for anything "stable" in memtest I guess I would had wanted like at-least an hour without faults.

So then it become hard.


----------



## Jpmboy

aliquiswe said:


> But I didn't bothered about overclocking ALU & FPU performance because it's already 3-6 times faster than the AMD Phenom X4 9850 I had before.
> 
> Since I bought the faster RAM I just wanted to enable XMP and be done with it. But that's not how it worked. The reason I haven't followed any overclocking guide is because I haven't had the intention to follow one. I haven't wanted to know what my processor can do as far as clocks and with or without AVX loads go. As such "this is a reasonable voltage and temperature limit now see how far you can go" for instance haven't been relevant because I haven't bothered. All I wanted to do was to run the RAM at that clock and all I assumed from the XMP setting was to have those values entered into BIOS and then for the RAM to kinda work because it was on the QVL without the motherboard doing other stupid things to try to get there. I never changed the vcore. Don't know if the MSI board would be a better start either. Need to send this **** away some days ago up to at-least on Friday if I don't want it and I definitely don't want both. Don't know what I should do and I feel so pressured in time. Has always done. If I sent both back and then got new stuff I would at-least have more time to think about it but I wouldn't get the prices I paid on black friday.
> 
> Also I don't have much time to do all that much ****.
> 
> It's 01:43 now and 02 + 8 hours of sleep is 10 and one need to leave a post package before 16 to know if leave in time so that's 6 hours which include other stuff like eating breakfast and such, plus removing all computer parts and setting it up again take 1-1.5 hour and if I were to send it back stripping it down once again take even more time. Also for anything "stable" in memtest I guess I would had wanted like at-least an hour without faults.
> 
> So then it become hard.


well then it is clear... ram oc will do nothing alone. (period) best to just run at SPD (2133). Just send it all back and better buy a pre-built from a good system integrator :thumb:


----------



## feznz

aliquiswe said:


> But I didn't bothered about overclocking ALU & FPU performance because it's already 3-6 times faster than the AMD Phenom X4 9850 I had before.
> 
> Since I bought the faster RAM I just wanted to enable XMP and be done with it. But that's not how it worked. The reason I haven't followed any overclocking guide is because I haven't had the intention to follow one. I haven't wanted to know what my processor can do as far as clocks and with or without AVX loads go. As such "this is a reasonable voltage and temperature limit now see how far you can go" for instance haven't been relevant because I haven't bothered. All I wanted to do was to run the RAM at that clock and all I assumed from the XMP setting was to have those values entered into BIOS and then for the RAM to kinda work because it was on the QVL without the motherboard doing other stupid things to try to get there. I never changed the vcore. Don't know if the MSI board would be a better start either. Need to send this **** away some days ago up to at-least on Friday if I don't want it and I definitely don't want both. Don't know what I should do and I feel so pressured in time. Has always done. If I sent both back and then got new stuff I would at-least have more time to think about it but I wouldn't get the prices I paid on black friday.
> 
> Also I don't have much time to do all that much ****.
> 
> It's 01:43 now and 02 + 8 hours of sleep is 10 and one need to leave a post package before 16 to know if leave in time so that's 6 hours which include other stuff like eating breakfast and such, plus removing all computer parts and setting it up again take 1-1.5 hour and if I were to send it back stripping it down once again take even more time. Also for anything "stable" in memtest I guess I would had wanted like at-least an hour without faults.
> 
> So then it become hard.



The rabbit never wins the race with the tortoise! slow down and READ Jmpboys guide.

But from what I can decipher from your post you want to run all stock but ram is NOT on QVL then it may not work.
SO CMSO button on rear press F1 on boot set Ai tuner to manual and put in ONLY ram speed and timings in manually and check DDR Voltage is correct. 
if this does not make the system run stable then you might need to get Ram that is on QVL 

another possibility is cpu or ram is not seated properly 

Jmboy i was meant to post that lowering VSA and VCCIO had fixed my CPU OC issues :thumb:
I really don't want to OC the ram more but sometimes I get bored and get silly ideas


----------



## chibi

Jpmboy said:


> all you get is a cpu fan warning at start up. if you want that capability (done the right way) run your pump off an aquaero with the ATX jumper cable.



This I do have as well! An Aquaero 6 Pro at least. How abouts do you go about connecting this ATX Jumper Cable up? Would I be correct to order the following?

https://www.moddiy.com/products/Aqu...-24-pin-ATX-Standby-Power-{47}-ATX-Break.html


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Man I dodged a bullet with my Apex today.

I got home from going for a swim and my Air con had been dripping into my tower, luckily it was going behind my board.
Only noticed when I had a hard lock.

Shut it down removed the Apex, and there was 1 tiny splash of water on the back of the USB 2 header, no where else on the motherboard.
Cleaned off the USB header with Isopropyl and a soft toothbrush, powered on and it works, been testing it for the last hour.
I'm guessing the water shorted out the USB port and made the system hang, I spent a good hour going over every inch of the board to make sure there was no water on the front or under the CPU.

Yet the bottom of my Primo I kid you not was FULL of water, it made a huge puddle on the floor when I tipped it on it's side.
Luckily the PSU was side mounted with a good inch off the bottom of the case.
Split compartment cases for the win...


----------



## aliquiswe

feznz said:


> The rabbit never wins the race with the tortoise! slow down and READ Jmpboys guide.
> 
> But from what I can decipher from your post you want to run all stock but ram is NOT on QVL then it may not work.
> SO CMSO button on rear press F1 on boot set Ai tuner to manual and put in ONLY ram speed and timings in manually and check DDR Voltage is correct.
> if this does not make the system run stable then you might need to get Ram that is on QVL
> 
> another possibility is cpu or ram is not seated properly
> 
> Jmboy i was meant to post that lowering VSA and VCCIO had fixed my CPU OC issues :thumb:
> I really don't want to OC the ram more but sometimes I get bored and get silly ideas


I could read lots of stuff but I've already spent a lot of time on this and I need even more time to go further and it doesn't contribute positively to my well-being.

The RAM is on the ASUS QVL. However simply turning on XMP doesn't make it run with either i7 8700K.
Maybe it can run at some setting whatever that is.

errors seemed to have been coming from a series of address that last time but maybe that's expected: http://www.overclock.net/forum/6-in...official-support-thread-140.html#post26758577

I have no CMOS clear button but I've cleared be BIOS and done what you said above + the IO and SA part but not change of core voltage and that didn't worked (as said.)

Neither of the CPUs have ever worked and they have been seated at-least .. four or so times so that's unlikely. Ram has never worked either and has been seated .. maybe five? I don't know.

I assume the whatever he's called guy on YouTube which run game benchmarks with faster RAM may have done so on boards enabling MCE. Considering his results has contradicted what so many others have said. Or it may be true. I wasn't sure about getting the higher priced RAM but they also had Samsung B-die which seem to work better with Ryzen so eventually I got them anyway (and the Corsair rather than G.Skill happened to be on sale.)

In atleast Arma 3 there definitely is a performance boost using lower latency memory. It make sense the demand for more memory bandwidth would increase the faster the processor can do stuff so I won't argue against that. However of course lower memory latency would be there regardless of load. Depending on how much memory work you do it will of course make more or less of a difference and at theoretical max it won't make much of a difference anyway and higher bandwidth will of course help especially when a larger amount of data is in demand and then for tasks involving working with RAM rather than other tasks I assume.


----------



## Jpmboy

chibi said:


> This I do have as well! An Aquaero 6 Pro at least. How abouts do you go about connecting this ATX Jumper Cable up? Would I be correct to order the following?
> 
> https://www.moddiy.com/products/Aqu...-24-pin-ATX-Standby-Power-{47}-ATX-Break.html


yep, that's it. works like a charm. read the AQ manual sectrion dealing with this and set the AQ6 to either power off or do a "controlled shut down". 


schoolofmonkey said:


> Man I dodged a bullet with my Apex today.
> 
> I got home from going for a swim and my Air con had been dripping into my tower, luckily it was going behind my board.
> Only noticed when I had a hard lock.
> 
> Shut it down removed the Apex, and there was 1 tiny splash of water on the back of the USB 2 header, no where else on the motherboard.
> Cleaned off the USB header with Isopropyl and a soft toothbrush, powered on and it works, been testing it for the last hour.
> I'm guessing the water shorted out the USB port and made the system hang, I spent a good hour going over every inch of the board to make sure there was no water on the front or under the CPU.
> 
> Yet the bottom of my Primo I kid you not was FULL of water, it made a huge puddle on the floor when I tipped it on it's side.
> Luckily the PSU was side mounted with a good inch off the bottom of the case.
> Split compartment cases for the win...


monkey the bullet dodger... "why do they call him bullet dodger"... "because he dodges bullets Avi." (snatched)


----------



## chibi

Jpmboy said:


> yep, that's it. works like a charm. read the AQ manual sectrion dealing with this and set the AQ6 to either power off or do a "controlled shut down".



Thx brotha! Would rep if could!


----------



## aliquiswe

Forget about it


----------



## feznz

aliquiswe said:


> I could read lots of stuff but I've already spent a lot of time on this and I need even more time to go further and it doesn't contribute positively to my well-being.
> 
> The RAM is on the ASUS QVL. However simply turning on XMP doesn't make it run with either i7 8700K.
> Maybe it can run at some setting whatever that is.
> 
> errors seemed to have been coming from a series of address that last time but maybe that's expected: http://www.overclock.net/forum/6-in...official-support-thread-140.html#post26758577
> 
> I have no CMOS clear button but I've cleared be BIOS and done what you said above + the IO and SA part but not change of core voltage and that didn't worked (as said.)
> 
> Neither of the CPUs have ever worked and they have been seated at-least .. four or so times so that's unlikely. Ram has never worked either and has been seated .. maybe five? I don't know.
> 
> I assume the whatever he's called guy on YouTube which run game benchmarks with faster RAM may have done so on boards enabling MCE. Considering his results has contradicted what so many others have said. Or it may be true. I wasn't sure about getting the higher priced RAM but they also had Samsung B-die which seem to work better with Ryzen so eventually I got them anyway (and the Corsair rather than G.Skill happened to be on sale.)
> 
> In atleast Arma 3 there definitely is a performance boost using lower latency memory. It make sense the demand for more memory bandwidth would increase the faster the processor can do stuff so I won't argue against that. However of course lower memory latency would be there regardless of load. Depending on how much memory work you do it will of course make more or less of a difference and at theoretical max it won't make much of a difference anyway and higher bandwidth will of course help especially when a larger amount of data is in demand and then for tasks involving working with RAM rather than other tasks I assume.



OK I can now understand your frustration 
No CMOS button ? you took the battery out so that would do the same job.
the only other thing I could suggest to try is use the other ram slots and check for bent pins in the motherboard CPU socket I am at a loss though seems the only common component is the motherboard
The way I understand this is with 2 CPUs and 2 Sets of ram.


----------



## aliquiswe

feznz said:


> OK I can now understand your frustration
> No CMOS button ? you took the battery out so that would do the same job.
> the only other thing I could suggest to try is use the other ram slots and check for bent pins in the motherboard CPU socket I am at a loss though seems the only common component is the motherboard
> The way I understand this is with 2 CPUs and 2 Sets of ram.


Yeah the store told me to clear it by removing the battery 15 minutes but I removed it and tested on the MSI board instead so it was out until the next day. Later I've used screw and screwdriver between the jumper pins and each time it has asked me to press F1 after boot so that have clearly worked too. The MSI board have a clear cmos button at the back though. And debug leds.

The RAM have worked with XMP on the ASUS board too as long as I only used one of them. I haven't changed from the 2 ports they recommend for a par of DIMMs but I won't bother with it any longer.

Hopefully they will accept return if sent tomorrow to so I'll just send it away, I could had kept the MSI board instead but since my end time is the same I think I'll send both and later get the Gaming 5 instead which after you discount €40 Steam wallet cost 150 SEK more / less than 10% more and have the same (input) audio quality as the Strix (higher THD but those values seem so very low so do they matter whatsoever? Of course all the values are very low =P) and add wifi (though only 1x1) and another m.2 slot (I unlikely need it) and front type C header and possibly better VRM than the MSI board. Of course in reality it's 570 SEK more and with €40 Steam wallet but I buy bundles for $1000 per year anyway which I don't play. Don't really buy games directly on Steam because I don't see why but wallet isn't completely useless. 

It's just with one set of RAM. But the way I see it the components which say it will work is the RAM modules and the ASUS QVL. The one which doesn't say so is the processor. But I had tried with TWO processors.

Some people suggest they have more luck with g.skill than corsair and trust me I prefer the look and would had gotten that if they had the same price back then but they didn't and I definitely can't return the RAM any longer. Also I wouldn't dare claim they are broken because there's 0 guarantee the CPU will support them. As for the motherboard. Maybe. Maybe not. I could return the CPU some time ago and I had a good feeling about doing so but since the other CPU didn't worked either and I had gotten the first CPU at a good price I kept it. Now I wish I didn't and could had started from scratch there.

The best scratch would of course had been had I ordered something like the i7 8700 with the 20% discount I had then (i7 8700K also had a much higher premium when now because it was so rare to find one) and something like the MSI Z370 Sli/AC or so and then the 2666 MHz Crucial kit they had at a later time like 27% cheaper than the Vengeance kit I bought. Would had saved me a lot of money and work and everything would had worked and performed just as well as it does currently =P

Back before when there was warnings about higher voltage OC RAM on Intel processors with integrated memory controller I used to advice people against it because it didn't seemed worth the effort. Of course low CL memory kits usually wasn't worth it either in performance so that too. I assumed things was different now with people here bragging about 4000+ MHz and whining on Ryzen "only" doing 3200 MHz but clearly not. So I'll remember that and include that in my responses onwards when people who are unsure what to get at all ask.

(Also call me as stupid as you want but I assumed enabling an XMP profile simply automatically filled in the values on the box of the RAM sticks and that was it. I didn't expected it to change anything at all unless the manufacturer had done some RAM stick specific tweaks since RAM compatibility seem to increase with BIOS revisions. Also the MSI webpage is like "ladida, push on to enable safe overclock!" (enable game boost / whatever) and here people seem to write that off as, "safe?" Bunch of video reviewers being like "I always start with using the built in overclocking to see how far that can get me before I do anything manually" too. The market should be clearer. Like selling alcohol and tobacco.)


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> monkey the bullet dodger... "why do they call him bullet dodger"... "because he dodges bullets Avi." (snatched)


Well after 8 hours of OCCT I'd say everything is ok.
Ended up putting my system back into my Corsair Air 540, so now I have a front mounted Radiator.
Had to take the rubber gromits off the Noctua fans to fit it there because of the GTX1080ti Strix though.


----------



## HvacGuru

schoolofmonkey said:


> Well after 8 hours of OCCT I'd say everything is ok.
> Ended up putting my system back into my Corsair Air 540, so now I have a front mounted Radiator.
> Had to take the rubber gromits off the Noctua fans to fit it there because of the GTX1080ti Strix though.


Those fans with fit on the outside of the case( Corsair Air 540) as push fans. You lose the dust filter but gain all that room inside. Just a fyi


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> Well after 8 hours of OCCT I'd say everything is ok.
> Ended up putting my system back into my Corsair Air 540, so now I have a front mounted Radiator.
> Had to take the rubber gromits off the Noctua fans to fit it there because of the GTX1080ti Strix though.


8 hours? you are cruel to these little pieces of silicon.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> 8 hours? you are cruel to these little pieces of silicon.


Learnt from the best man 

It was only a Large Data Set test... lol


----------



## feznz

Spoiler






> aliquiswe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah the store told me to clear it by removing the battery 15 minutes but I removed it and tested on the MSI board instead so it was out until the next day. Later I've used screw and screwdriver between the jumper pins and each time it has asked me to press F1 after boot so that have clearly worked too. The MSI board have a clear cmos button at the back though. And debug leds.
> 
> The RAM have worked with XMP on the ASUS board too as long as I only used one of them. I haven't changed from the 2 ports they recommend for a par of DIMMs but I won't bother with it any longer.
> 
> Hopefully they will accept return if sent tomorrow to so I'll just send it away, I could had kept the MSI board instead but since my end time is the same I think I'll send both and later get the Gaming 5 instead which after you discount €40 Steam wallet cost 150 SEK more / less than 10% more and have the same (input) audio quality as the Strix (higher THD but those values seem so very low so do they matter whatsoever? Of course all the values are very low =P) and add wifi (though only 1x1) and another m.2 slot (I unlikely need it) and front type C header and possibly better VRM than the MSI board. Of course in reality it's 570 SEK more and with €40 Steam wallet but I buy bundles for $1000 per year anyway which I don't play. Don't really buy games directly on Steam because I don't see why but wallet isn't completely useless.
> 
> It's just with one set of RAM. But the way I see it the components which say it will work is the RAM modules and the ASUS QVL. The one which doesn't say so is the processor. But I had tried with TWO processors.
> 
> Some people suggest they have more luck with g.skill than corsair and trust me I prefer the look and would had gotten that if they had the same price back then but they didn't and I definitely can't return the RAM any longer. Also I wouldn't dare claim they are broken because there's 0 guarantee the CPU will support them. As for the motherboard. Maybe. Maybe not. I could return the CPU some time ago and I had a good feeling about doing so but since the other CPU didn't worked either and I had gotten the first CPU at a good price I kept it. Now I wish I didn't and could had started from scratch there.
> 
> The best scratch would of course had been had I ordered something like the i7 8700 with the 20% discount I had then (i7 8700K also had a much higher premium when now because it was so rare to find one) and something like the MSI Z370 Sli/AC or so and then the 2666 MHz Crucial kit they had at a later time like 27% cheaper than the Vengeance kit I bought. Would had saved me a lot of money and work and everything would had worked and performed just as well as it does currently =P
> 
> Back before when there was warnings about higher voltage OC RAM on Intel processors with integrated memory controller I used to advice people against it because it didn't seemed worth the effort. Of course low CL memory kits usually wasn't worth it either in performance so that too. I assumed things was different now with people here bragging about 4000+ MHz and whining on Ryzen "only" doing 3200 MHz but clearly not. So I'll remember that and include that in my responses onwards when people who are unsure what to get at all ask.
Click to expand...







> (Also call me as stupid as you want but I assumed enabling an XMP profile simply automatically filled in the values on the box of the RAM sticks and that was it. I didn't expected it to change anything at all unless the manufacturer had done some RAM stick specific tweaks since RAM compatibility seem to increase with BIOS revisions. Also the MSI webpage is like "ladida, push on to enable safe overclock!" (enable game boost / whatever) and here people seem to write that off as, "safe?" Bunch of video reviewers being like "I always start with using the built in overclocking to see how far that can get me before I do anything manually" too. The market should be clearer. Like selling alcohol and tobacco.)


I am more confused than ever 2 motherboards 2 cpus 1 set of ram I think it would be obvious that the ram itself is looking rather suspect.
All I going to say I hope the best of luck with the Gaming 5 you are going to need it :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

aliquiswe said:


> _snip_.
> 
> (Also call me as stupid as you want but I assumed enabling an XMP profile simply automatically filled in the values on the box of the RAM sticks and that was it. I didn't expected it to change anything at all unless the manufacturer had done some RAM stick specific tweaks since RAM compatibility seem to increase with BIOS revisions. Also the MSI webpage is like "ladida, push on to enable safe overclock!" (enable game boost / whatever) and here people seem to write that off as, "safe?" Bunch of video reviewers being like "I always start with using the built in overclocking to see how far that can get me before I do anything manually" too. *The market should be clearer. Like selling alcohol and tobacco.*)


I agree:

1. Overclock responsibly, and use a designated driver.
2. Overclocking can be hazardous to your computer.
3. _Auto _and _volt _are 2 four letter words you should not use in public, or in the same sentence. 

There's the warning label.



on the other hand...


----------



## apw63

chibi said:


> This I do have as well! An Aquaero 6 Pro at least. How abouts do you go about connecting this ATX Jumper Cable up? Would I be correct to order the following?
> 
> https://www.moddiy.com/products/Aqu...-24-pin-ATX-Standby-Power-{47}-ATX-Break.html


You can also do shutdown with the aquaero Plug for relay connector, 3 contacts (for aquaero 5 and 6) http://shop.aquacomputer.de/product_info.php?products_id=2665&language=en. Configure as on the right in diagram, just another option, might be a little cleaner.


----------



## feznz

I wonder sometimes too there could be more fact than fiction to this :lachen: but a must see funny movie


----------



## zGunBLADEz

what asus is using to read and activate the vrm protection when vrms dont have a sensor probe on the board perse?

According to oc3d on youtube the strix mobo dont have a sensor on it, i dont see the diode on my apps and my cpu package temp are on check on a 200w+ load the package dont go over 75c as tops, cpu is delidded custom loop but the thing starts throttling after couple of minutes, did a sweep on the vrm with my ir gun and the temps are on check, i have loaded him over 1.45v temps still on check, so how the mobo throttles the thing i dont know..

I turned off the vrm protection on the bios and the throttling stop. I have the vrms active cooled as well with a 120mm corsair SP @ 2700rpms while testing

That and the LLC thing have me looking elsewhere for my next motherboard


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> what asus is using to read and activate the vrm protection when vrms dont have a sensor probe on the board perse?
> 
> According to oc3d on youtube the strix mobo dont have a sensor on it, i dont see the diode on my apps and my cpu package temp are on check on a 200w+ load the package dont go over 75c as tops, cpu is delidded custom loop but the thing starts throttling after couple of minutes, did a sweep on the vrm with my ir gun and the temps are on check, i have loaded him over 1.45v temps still on check, so how the mobo throttles the thing i dont know..
> 
> I turned off the vrm protection on the bios and the throttling stop. I have the vrms active cooled as well with a 120mm corsair SP @ 2700rpms while testing
> 
> That and the LLC thing have me looking elsewhere for my next motherboard


 Hard to understand what's going on there, if the is no vrm temp sensor, then throttling would not be due to it increasing temp readout, right? ... unless it's bleeding a signal from another DTS. May be a buggy sample. But yeah, there are plenty of other boards out there. :thumb:


----------



## KedarWolf

Making sure i'm subscribed, only know how to buy posting here. :/


----------



## feznz

KedarWolf said:


> Making sure i'm subscribed, only know how to buy posting here. :/


under thread tools top R/h side 

but have to say been a week after your advice with vssio and sa been clocked @ 5.2Mhz with AVX of 2 no signs of instability so far...


----------



## KedarWolf

feznz said:


> under thread tools top R/h side
> 
> but have to say been a week after your advice with vssio and sa been clocked @ 5.2Mhz with AVX of 2 no signs of instability so far...


Great!!


----------



## Jpmboy

KW deserves a bunch of reps... if the button ever comes back!!


----------



## apw63

I have a question about listing OC vcore stable settings. Is the preferred method the setting in the bios or what’s reported in cpu-z?


----------



## feznz

Jpmboy said:


> KW deserves a bunch of reps... if the button ever comes back!!


you were on my list too if I remember  seriously though features are taking a long time but I see that the sig rig and was scheduled for this week but the rep button I would presume was not that hard



apw63 said:


> I have a question about listing OC vcore stable settings. Is the preferred method the setting in the bios or what’s reported in cpu-z?


I would say adaptive mode is the preferred for 24/7 and bios settings will always be slightly different depending on v/droop, LL calibration and program used to monitor voltage. I generally use CPUz because it reports the higher voltage than most programs no idea why.

but Jmboys guide in his sig and on OP page will give you a good guide to start.


----------



## Jpmboy

apw63 said:


> I have a question about listing OC vcore stable settings. Is the preferred method the setting in the bios or what’s reported in cpu-z?


cpuZ will only report in 16mV increments, whereas in bios (tho adaptive and manual differ) you hav1 or 5 mV level control.



feznz said:


> you were on my list too if I remember  seriously though features are taking a long time but I see that the sig rig and was scheduled for this week but the rep button I would presume was not that hard
> 
> I would say adaptive mode is the preferred for 24/7 and bios settings will always be slightly different depending on v/droop, LL calibration and program used to monitor voltage. I generally use CPUz because it reports the higher voltage than most programs no idea why.
> 
> but Jmboys guide in his sig and on OP page will give you a good guide to start.


I asked the same about the rep button... it's claimed to be more complicated without any further detail., Seems to me that just changing the "Like" button they did have to "REP" would have been enough you'd think.


----------



## apw63

What I’m asking is, when I post my OC is stable to X ghz with Y vcore. Is the preferred reference what is set in the bios or what is reported in programs like cpu-z? The reason I ask is. The bios setting is typically more than what is reported in programs like cpu-z.


----------



## Jpmboy

apw63 said:


> What I’m asking is, when I post my OC is stable to X ghz with Y vcore. Is the preferred reference what is set in the bios or what is reported in programs like cpu-z? The reason I ask is. The bios setting is* typically more than what is reported in programs like cpu-z.*


this really depends on whether there is a IVR or external VR (then cpuz only reports VID, not vcore). In any case, just use CPUZ. no big deal.


----------



## klepp0906

Thank GOD one of these threads exists!

Spent a fortune on upgrading my pc after my old mobo took a dump. Went with the formula. 

Problem I'm having that I assume most of you are as well (that have a board with integrated wifi) is that I'm being bombarded with whea errors in event viewer. I was actually turned onto them by hwinfo while doing my initial overclock etc. 

They're the whea 17 hardware corrected variant that references a pci express port and show my WiFi adapter as the device ID. 

After pouring hours into this doing the driver dance and a the google thing, I'm right where I started for the most part. 

The two things that make it go away are 1) disabling the wlan in the bios. (Unacceptable - it was one of the perks I wanted from this board) or 2) disabling native ASPM in the bios (also unacceptable as in old, broke, have kids, and like my pc to last awhile). 

So it's obviously an issue with power saving that's not working right with the card or port I imagine. 

Either way - anyone else have any other info for me please?

I was so worried it was a hardware issue. After spending a literal week tearing down my old build, cleaning my loop, and plumbing this thing into my case lol.


----------



## Asus11

my Asrock fatality ITX is giving me trouble , keeps randomly freezing no BSOD, after searching on the net it seems like its a widespread problem with nearly all Z370 Asrock boards, something to do with iffy XMP settings.

some have managed to stop it by disabling XMP etc and disabling C state, ive tried it all and it still does it, I really can't afford for this to happen anymore, I know the Fatality is rated the best ITX but whats the next best thing to it? I never had an issue with my impact VIII, but the STRIX ITX looks like weak sauce


----------



## Jpmboy

Asus11 said:


> my Asrock fatality ITX is giving me trouble , keeps randomly freezing no BSOD, after searching on the net it seems like its a widespread problem with nearly all Z370 Asrock boards, something to do with iffy XMP settings.
> 
> some have managed to stop it by disabling XMP etc and disabling C state, ive tried it all and it still does it, I really can't afford for this to happen anymore, I know the Fatality is rated the best ITX but whats the next best thing to it? I never had an issue with my impact VIII, but the STRIX ITX looks like weak sauce


did you do a fresh flash then no XMP and disable c-states? (damn - I just hate XMP!)


----------



## looniam

Jpmboy said:


> KW deserves a bunch of reps... if the button ever comes back!!


it's the star. 

and yes, i did because you said so.


----------



## Asus11

what do you mean fresh flash?

but yes I did disable XMP and disable c-states - that only tbh 

I just wanted to make sure the PC was stable at stock before overclocking it


----------



## Jpmboy

Asus11 said:


> what do you mean fresh flash?
> 
> but yes I did disable XMP and disable c-states - that only tbh
> 
> I just wanted to make sure the PC was stable at stock before overclocking it


flash (or even reflash) with the most recent bios. I did assume you had enabled XMP and can't get the behavior removed. There are settings changed by XMP that we do not have access to in bios. Most times a clrcmos is sufficient, but if not. Flash the bios.


----------



## Jpmboy

looniam said:


> it's the star.
> 
> and yes, i did because you said so.


let the reps loose! :cheers:


----------



## Asus11

Jpmboy said:


> flash (or even reflash) with the most recent bios. I did assume you had enabled XMP and can't get the behavior removed. There are settings changed by XMP that we do not have access to in bios. Most times a clrcmos is sufficient, but if not. Flash the bios.


I will flash the bios and hope for the best if not strix itx or msi carbon itx? hmmm


----------



## hdtvnut

I just bought a MXH board and SL 5.2 8700K. And G.Skill 2x8GB 4266 speed ram, part number F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW (1.40v), which is not on the QVL. Should this be OK? I haven't opened it yet.


----------



## feznz

Could you wait this long I bet you already opened it to find them working find just don't use XMP and if you have CLMOS and put memory setting in manually


----------



## apw63

Need explanation on behavior I’m seeing please. 
8700k
Asus MXF
Corsair dominator ddr4 3200 16gb 4x4 sticks
Asus strix 1080 Ti OC

I followed Jpmboys coffee lake oc guide. I was able to get a stable oc of 5ghz with a bios vcore of 1.37v. Ram set in bios at 3200 not XMP. AVX offset set to 0. When I would run realbench I would get a vdroop with the llc 5 setting of ~ .04v (reported in HWinfo). When I would run handbrake I would see a more dramatic vdroop, the vcore would drop to 1.296v. I decided to switch to llc 6. Now instead of vdroop I get a rise in vcore up to 1.397. I’ve been lowering the bios vcore down and I’m still stable at 1.34v, HWinfo reports 1.36v. 

Is this normal behavior? When I which to llc 6 I’m seeing the opposite of vdroop.


----------



## Cata79

Asus11 said:


> my Asrock fatality ITX is giving me trouble , keeps randomly freezing no BSOD, after searching on the net it seems like its a widespread problem with nearly all Z370 Asrock boards, something to do with iffy XMP settings.
> 
> some have managed to stop it by disabling XMP etc and disabling C state, ive tried it all and it still does it, I really can't afford for this to happen anymore, I know the Fatality is rated the best ITX but whats the next best thing to it? I never had an issue with my impact VIII, but the STRIX ITX looks like weak sauce


Lower the vccio to 1.1 and vccsa to 1.15, see if it happens again.


----------



## KedarWolf

Hey Peeps.

If you're going to delid your CPU I strongly recommend glueing it back on with Black RTV Silicone Adhesive Sealant.

It looks the same as the glue Intel uses, easy to remove if you need to take the heatsink off again.

DON'T use Krazy glue. I messed up my delid first time around and even acetone wouldn't remove the dried Krazy glue. 

But acetone DOES remove CLU and Conductonaut.


----------



## scracy

apw63 said:


> Need explanation on behavior I’m seeing please.
> 8700k
> Asus MXF
> Corsair dominator ddr4 3200 16gb 4x4 sticks
> Asus strix 1080 Ti OC
> 
> I followed Jpmboys coffee lake oc guide. I was able to get a stable oc of 5ghz with a bios vcore of 1.37v. Ram set in bios at 3200 not XMP. AVX offset set to 0. When I would run realbench I would get a vdroop with the llc 5 setting of ~ .04v (reported in HWinfo). When I would run handbrake I would see a more dramatic vdroop, the vcore would drop to 1.296v. I decided to switch to llc 6. Now instead of vdroop I get a rise in vcore up to 1.397. I’ve been lowering the bios vcore down and I’m still stable at 1.34v, HWinfo reports 1.36v.
> 
> Is this normal behavior? When I which to llc 6 I’m seeing the opposite of vdroop.


My MXF behaves the same way [email protected] (UEFI) LLC 5 drops to 1.376V (Windows) under load (OCCT large) but LLC 6 pushes the voltage up, Vdroop amount depends on which instruction set a particular stress test is using


----------



## apw63

scracy said:


> My MXF behaves the same way [email protected] (UEFI) LLC 5 drops to 1.376V (Windows) under load (OCCT large) but LLC 6 pushes the voltage up, Vdroop amount depends on which instruction set a particular stress test is using


Thank you. Using llc 6 allows me to achieve a higher OC at a lower vcore. Right now 5Ghz @1.325v in UEFI in windows HWinfo 1.344v, core temps running mid 60s. I should be able to get an even higher OC, only time will tell.


----------



## scracy

apw63 said:


> Thank you. Using llc 6 allows me to achieve a higher OC at a lower vcore. Right now 5Ghz @1.325v in UEFI in windows HWinfo 1.344v, core temps running mid 60s. I should be able to get an even higher OC, only time will tell.


Personally I prefer a higher Vcore without load and then let Vdroop do its thing which is why I set 1.39V in UEFI to achieve 1.376V under load using LLC 5, I could set 1.36V in the UEFI and use LLC 6 and achieve the same thing or at least on paper but I prefer to have the voltage drop under load rather than relying on LLC to push up the voltage


----------



## Jpmboy

apw63 said:


> Need explanation on behavior I’m seeing please.
> 8700k
> Asus MXF
> Corsair dominator ddr4 3200 16gb 4x4 sticks
> Asus strix 1080 Ti OC
> 
> I followed Jpmboys coffee lake oc guide. I was able to get a stable oc of 5ghz with a bios vcore of 1.37v. Ram set in bios at 3200 not XMP. AVX offset set to 0. When I would run realbench I would get a vdroop with the llc 5 setting of ~ .04v (reported in HWinfo). When I would run handbrake I would see a more dramatic vdroop, the vcore would drop to 1.296v. I decided to switch to llc 6. Now instead of vdroop I get a rise in vcore up to 1.397. I’ve been lowering the bios vcore down and I’m still stable at 1.34v, HWinfo reports 1.36v.
> 
> Is this normal behavior? When I which to llc 6 I’m seeing the opposite of vdroop.


Does it bsod when it droops to 1.296V?? Rather than decreasing vdroop vis LLC6, just increase the vcore. The extent of vdroop is a good indicator of the current draw under load. So if handbrake is showing a large(r) droop that's because the current draw is higher.. and so would be the load-change swing from the set value. In the scenario you describe, I would increase vcore in bios... and not let LLC add the needed vcore. Best to not completely defeat vdroop.


----------



## apw63

scracy said:


> Personally I prefer a higher Vcore without load and then let Vdroop do its thing which is why I set 1.39V in UEFI to achieve 1.376V under load using LLC 5, I could set 1.36V in the UEFI and use LLC 6 and achieve the same thing or at least on paper but I prefer to have the voltage drop under load rather than relying on LLC to push up the voltage [/QUOTE
> 
> 
> 
> Jpmboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does it bsod when it droops to 1.296V?? Rather than decreasing vdroop vis LLC6, just increase the vcore. The extent of vdroop is a good indicator of eh current draw under load. So if handbrake is showing a large(r) droop that because the currnet draw is higher.. and so would be the load-change swing from the set value. In the scenario you decscribe, I would increase vcore in bios... and not let LLC add the needed vcore. Best to not completely defeat vdroop.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you both for the help and info.
> 
> jpmboy the system did not bsod, it started to get hardware errors in HWinfo. I stopped handbrake before bsod acured. I will go back to llc 5 and up the vcore to 1.38v and see what happens.
Click to expand...


----------



## Jpmboy

apw63 said:


> scracy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I prefer a higher Vcore without load and then let Vdroop do its thing which is why I set 1.39V in UEFI to achieve 1.376V under load using LLC 5, I could set 1.36V in the UEFI and use LLC 6 and achieve the same thing or at least on paper but I prefer to have the voltage drop under load rather than relying on LLC to push up the voltage [/QUOTE
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you both for the help and info.
> 
> jpmboy the system did not bsod, I started started to get hardware errors in HWinfo. I stopped handbrake before bsod acured. I will go back to llc 5 and up the vcore to 1.38v and see what happens.
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - if it is getting simple correctable WHEA ("machine check error" also known as an MCE), you are very close and a tad bit more vcore will likely solve the problem with realbench. I know we all shoot for the lowest possible vcore for an OC, however, for many rigs here, I generally find that value and add a few mV on top for peace of mind (10mV or so)
Click to expand...


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> apw63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - if it is getting simple correctable WHEA ("machine check error" also known as an MCE), you are very close and a tad bit more vcore will likely solve the problem with realbench. I know we all shoot for the lowest possible vcore for an OC, however, for many rigs here, I generally find that value and add a few mV on top for peace of mind (10mV or so)
> 
> 
> 
> I've been wondering, do you do any of the Windows 10 tweaks (disabling telemetry etc) or when you do a clean install just leave it as is.
> Because I've been doing a few of those tweaks, but the more recent version of Windows 10 I've found it breaks more than it fixes (like Windows shutting down mapped network drives and having to refresh them every time you go into My PC).
> 
> A little OT sorry
Click to expand...


----------



## scracy

Congratulations Jpmboy for making the top 10 in the world rankings on HWBot, a massive achievement :thumbsups


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> Jpmboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been wondering, do you do any of the Windows 10 tweaks (disabling telemetry etc) or when you do a clean install just leave it as is.
> Because I've been doing a few of those tweaks, but the more recent version of Windows 10 I've found it breaks more than it fixes (like Windows shutting down mapped network drives and having to refresh them every time you go into My PC).
> 
> A little OT sorry
> 
> 
> 
> i really only use the tweaks on more "aged" installs... like x99 and x79.
> 
> 
> scracy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Congratulations Jpmboy for making the top 10 in the world rankings on HWBot, a massive achievement :thumbsups
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not sure I understand how I did that. Humbled tho.
Click to expand...


----------



## zGunBLADEz

i have been scratching my head with this mobo Asus Strix z370-G since day 1, theres something going on with it.

I think theres a problem or some some kind of crap on the bios that mess with stability with the way you set the voltages on it.
Im using 0606, i have the same problems on 0605 as well

for example if i set static vcore lets say 1.395v with LLC7 or 6 doesnt matter as long as it ends around 1.44v i can do 49x avx just fine anything lower it will crash the test.
I been playing with single multipliers and what not, temps are under control monoblock with 4x240s rad space all for herself
So i have test 49x-50x-51x something it pass sometimes it dont sometimes i manage to do 51x non avx with like 1.37v 




I started with static vcore as i always do turn every energy thing off pure multiplier and static voltage only with same behavior...


I decided to go adaptive and test different things. So i started with 1.41 plus + so it ends on 1.44v depending of the llc 6 or 7
it has to be around 1.44v without much fluctuation to be stable at 49x avx as my preliminary tests. I was trying to do the highest LLC and watch for spikes on avx so i can set the voltage static lower and use the high voltage without going ballistic on avx before this.


I ended on 1.385v with a negative 0.010 which nets me 49x at 1.392 TOTALLY stable from the 1.44v and 51x non avx at 1.37v........ i said wth it has to be a mistake. moved the offset a couple of volts up or down the voltage shoots up like crazy and you can see the temps react to it or it crashes bcuz of vdroop depending what i do with it.

But if i leave it at exactly 1.385 with the negative 0.010 i can do 51x just fine and 49x with less voltage than before.

Today i tried another approach, i lower my LLC to 5 instead of 6 or 7 same static voltage of 1.410 now i can do 51x with a vdroop that ends on 1.36v when before was no good trying to match that voltage with a higher LLC im still scratching my head wth is going on


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> Not sure I understand how I did that. Humbled tho.


Speaking of that, looks like Linus is competing with you


----------



## apw63

Jpmboy said:


> apw63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - if it is getting simple correctable WHEA ("machine check error" also known as an MCE), you are very close and a tad bit more vcore will likely solve the problem with realbench. I know we all shoot for the lowest possible vcore for an OC, however, for many rigs here, I generally find that value and add a few mV on top for peace of mind (10mV or so)
> 
> 
> 
> I was able to get my system stable @5GHZ with 1.38v fixed vcore with llc 5. Going to play with adaptive voltage tonight. In the end I will most likely bump it down to 4.9Ghz only need 1.315v fixed vcore with llc 5, no AVX offset. Temps at 5Ghz setting mid 60s, temps at 4.9Ghz setting mid 50s. Thank you for the help and advice.
Click to expand...


----------



## The Pook

Looking into upgrading my system to an 8700K and ideally want to stick to an Asus board since my Z170-E treated me so well. Am I missing anything massive by going with the Z370-A over something like the Z370-H? Just looks like a different color scheme but the prices make me second guess myself 

Going by what people are saying here it seems the A actually has better VRMs despite being cheaper...

Anyone got some insight?


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> Speaking of that, looks like Linus is competing with you


guess I need to try harder. 



apw63 said:


> Jpmboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was able to get my system stable @*5GHZ* with 1.38v fixed vcore with llc 5. Going to play with adaptive voltage tonight. In the end I will most likely bump it down to 4.9Ghz only need 1.315v fixed vcore with llc 5, no AVX offset. Temps at 5Ghz setting mid 60s, temps at 4.9Ghz setting mid 50s. Thank you for the help and advice.
> 
> 
> 
> probably have a better "feeling" rig by running 5.0 with a -2 AVX offset, jmo. 1.38V _is _getting up there tho. Honestly, a 4.9 8700K is amazingly quick thanks to it's top IPC. :thumb:
Click to expand...


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> i have been scratching my head with this mobo Asus Strix z370-G since day 1, theres something going on with it.
> 
> I think theres a problem or some some kind of crap on the bios that mess with stability with the way you set the voltages on it.
> Im using 0606, i have the same problems on 0605 as well
> 
> for example if i set static vcore lets say 1.395v with LLC7 or 6 doesnt matter as long as it ends around 1.44v i can do 49x avx just fine anything lower it will crash the test.
> I been playing with single multipliers and what not, temps are under control monoblock with 4x240s rad space all for herself
> So i have test 49x-50x-51x something it pass sometimes it dont sometimes i manage to do 51x non avx with like 1.37v
> 
> I started with static vcore as i always do turn every energy thing off pure multiplier and static voltage only with same behavior...
> 
> I decided to go adaptive and test different things. So i started with 1.41 plus + so it ends on 1.44v depending of the llc 6 or 7
> it has to be around 1.44v without much fluctuation to be stable at 49x avx as my preliminary tests. I was trying to do the highest LLC and watch for spikes on avx so i can set the voltage static lower and use the high voltage without going ballistic on avx before this.
> 
> 
> I ended on 1.385v with a negative 0.010 which nets me 49x at 1.392 TOTALLY stable from the 1.44v and 51x non avx at 1.37v........ i said wth it has to be a mistake. moved the offset a couple of volts up or down the voltage shoots up like crazy and you can see the temps react to it or it crashes bcuz of vdroop depending what i do with it.
> 
> But if i leave it at exactly 1.385 with the negative 0.010 i can do 51x just fine and 49x with less voltage than before.
> 
> Today i tried another approach, i lower my LLC to 5 instead of 6 or 7 same static voltage of 1.410 now i can do 51x with a vdroop that ends on 1.36v when before was no good trying to match that voltage with a higher LLC im still scratching my head wth is going on


with llc 6 or 7, you may be experiencing load transient spikes, affecting stability (happen on the microSec scale, so you will not see these without special tools). Droop is a good thing for a 24/7 rig.

These load transition spikes are a property of any voltage clamped circuit (eg, adaptive or manual vcore while at load) when the current changes (current = load). it swings both high and low, oscillating back to the resting state voltage (again, adaptive or manual, on a time scale that adaptive multiplier change cannot deal with).


----------



## scracy

Jpmboy said:


> with llc 6 or 7, you may be experiencing load transient spikes, affecting stability (happen on the microSec scale, so you will not see these without special tools). Droop is a good thing for a 24/7 rig.
> 
> These load transition spikes are a property of any voltage clamped circuit (eg, adaptive or manual vcore while at load) when the current changes (current = load). it swings both high and low, oscillating back to the resting state voltage (again, adaptive or manual, on a time scale that adaptive multiplier change cannot deal with).


Which is exactly the reason why I run mine 24/7 [email protected] (UEFI) LLC5 which in Windows under load drops to 1.376V


----------



## KedarWolf

If you're having trouble getting your system to post at 4266MHZ with B-Dies try higher tRFC.

If I set it at 411 I get these really great timings stable in RamTest below.

If I set it any lower really slow boot and sometimes fails into Safe Boot.

Oh, btw, I ordered G.Skill 4400 memory!! 

not letting me add an attachment, internal error.


----------



## Jpmboy

scracy said:


> Which is exactly the reason why I run mine 24/7 [email protected] (UEFI) LLC5 which in Windows under load drops to 1.376V


nice OC you have there! 


KedarWolf said:


> If you're having trouble getting your system to post at 4266MHZ with B-Dies try higher tRFC.
> If I set it at 411 I get these really great timings stable in RamTest below.
> If I set it any lower really slow boot and sometimes fails into Safe Boot.
> *Oh, btw, I ordered G.Skill 4400 memory!! *
> not letting me add an attachment, internal error.


Let us know how they do!


----------



## kevindd992002

Are the CHA_FAN fan headers in the Maximus X Code also PWM-controlled? Upon checking the manual, they do have a 4th PWM pin but in the table, under shared control, they have a blank value.


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> Are the CHA_FAN fan headers in the Maximus X Code also PWM-controlled? Upon checking the manual, they do have a 4th PWM pin but in the table, under shared control, they have a blank value.


I believe that means the control is not shared... each has its own control in bios (unlike the CPU and Pump controllers). PWM is selectable in bios.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> with llc 6 or 7, you may be experiencing load transient spikes, affecting stability (happen on the microSec scale, so you will not see these without special tools). Droop is a good thing for a 24/7 rig.
> 
> These load transition spikes are a property of any voltage clamped circuit (eg, adaptive or manual vcore while at load) when the current changes (current = load). it swings both high and low, oscillating back to the resting state voltage (again, adaptive or manual, on a time scale that adaptive multiplier change cannot deal with).


Thx for the info, i tried adaptive with a lower llc is working wonders now
Adaptive 1.385 + 0.025 supposedly it should be 1.41 but i have LLC4
so Vdroop is around 1.32v @ 51x

like seriously im still scratching my head never have this issues before and 0 issues so far its chewing P95 ffts in place 26.6 like nothing
now i have to accommodate all that and redo all my overclocks from scratch


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> Thx for the info, i tried adaptive with a lower llc is working wonders now
> Adaptive 1.385 *+ 0.025* supposedly it should be 1.41 but i have LLC4
> so Vdroop is around 1.32v @ 51x
> 
> like seriously im still scratching my head never have this issues before and 0 issues so far its chewing P95 ffts in place 26.6 like nothing
> now i have to accommodate all that and redo all my overclocks from scratch


any reason you seem to be running a 25mV offset with adaptive vcore?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

scracy said:


> Which is exactly the reason why I run mine 24/7 [email protected] (UEFI) LLC5 which in Windows under load drops to 1.376V


Is that OCCT Small Data Set stable


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> Is that OCCT Small Data Set stable


:spam1:









the 25mV must be for OCCT.


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> kevindd992002 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are the CHA_FAN fan headers in the Maximus X Code also PWM-controlled? Upon checking the manual, they do have a 4th PWM pin but in the table, under shared control, they have a blank value.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe that means the control is not shared... each has its own control in bios (unlike the CPU and Pump controllers). PWM is selectable in bios. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

Yeah. I realized that after posting here  I'm not able to test yet because my build is not yet finished.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thx for the info, i tried adaptive with a lower llc is working wonders now
> Adaptive 1.385 *+ 0.025* supposedly it should be 1.41 but i have LLC4
> so Vdroop is around 1.32v @ 51x
> 
> like seriously im still scratching my head never have this issues before and 0 issues so far its chewing P95 ffts in place 26.6 like nothing
> now i have to accommodate all that and redo all my overclocks from scratch
> 
> 
> 
> any reason you seem to be running a 25mV offset with adaptive vcore?
Click to expand...

Bcuz of the vdroop i cant find exactly the reason of it so far.... theres some weird behavior on adaptive with some voltages, theres some weird behavior on the whole thing and voltages and llc if you asked me.

If I try to set static vcore and llc6 and a set voltage let's say 1.41 so the vdroop is very minimal like 1.39v and 1.408 with the vdroop. i get a hard time on stability tests instant freezings and what not.

But lowering the llc and having a static high vcore i get better results.

For example LLC5, static vcore 1.45v i have a vdroop all way down to 1.39v which makes the 51x chew everything without freezings as im testing right now.

The temps im getting reflects the vdroop with the set voltage if i try a higher llc and real 1.45v i be up to mid 80s now im high 60s.

This crap was not possible before


----------



## KedarWolf

My G.Skill DDR4 4400 is arriving tomorrow according to tracking!!


----------



## scracy

schoolofmonkey said:


> Is that OCCT Small Data Set stable


OCCT large data set stable combined with Realbench, I tend to use both and found that for my purposes its plenty stable, CPU was purchased from another member here encrypted11, he had 2 really good 8700K's and offered me one of them, obviously he kept the slightly better one for himself


----------



## feznz

zGunBLADEz said:


> Bcuz of the vdroop i cant find exactly the reason of it so far.... theres some weird behavior on adaptive with some voltages, theres some weird behavior on the whole thing and voltages and llc if you asked me.
> 
> If I try to set static vcore and llc6 and a set voltage let's say 1.41 so the vdroop is very minimal like 1.39v and 1.408 with the vdroop. i get a hard time on stability tests instant freezings and what not.
> 
> But lowering the llc and having a static high vcore i get better results.
> 
> For example LLC5, static vcore 1.45v i have a vdroop all way down to 1.39v which makes the 51x chew everything without freezings as im testing right now.
> 
> The temps im getting reflects the vdroop with the set voltage if i try a higher llc and real 1.45v i be up to mid 80s now im high 60s.
> 
> This crap was not possible before


I had that too some time back..... though I cannot remember exactly what fixed it I have a feeling it was something from using XMP



Thought I had a stability problem start to check all setting event viewer etc just to realiise find the fix was here
http://geekspie.com/easily-fix-photo-app-crashing-in-windows-10/


----------



## zGunBLADEz

feznz said:


> I had that too some time back..... though I cannot remember exactly what fixed it I have a feeling it was something from using XMP
> 
> 
> 
> Thought I had a stability problem start to check all setting event viewer etc just to realiise find the fix was here
> http://geekspie.com/easily-fix-photo-app-crashing-in-windows-10/


I never use xmp as it tends to go ballistic on the voltages. I prefer old school ways but it looks like i have to adapt to this vdroop this time. I dont like the vdroop looks weird to me lol static means static and llc to get it as close to set voltage lol simple.

Having a vdroop of 0.050v+ (in my case is almost close to 0.100 look at the occt reading set vcore 1.45v vdroop all way down to 1.36V) looks very weird to me and be stable in top of that.

Thats the only way i manage to get finally super stable after the last 2 weeks of testing with a lower vcore on load even if the starting vcore point is 1.45v.

So playing with it i finally got the sweet vdroop setting for all my testings

Btw, about ur fix did the app crash on tests or what? Mine is not crashing im watching for whea errors as well.


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> Bcuz of the vdroop i cant find exactly the reason of it so far.... theres some weird behavior on adaptive with some voltages, theres some weird behavior on the whole thing and voltages and llc if you asked me.
> 
> If I try to set static vcore and llc6 and a set voltage let's say 1.41 so the vdroop is very minimal like 1.39v and 1.408 with the vdroop. i get a hard time on stability tests instant freezings and what not.
> 
> *But lowering the llc and having a static high vcore i get better results.*
> 
> For example LLC5, static vcore 1.45v i have a vdroop all way down to 1.39v which makes the 51x chew everything without freezings as im testing right now.
> 
> The temps im getting reflects the vdroop with the set voltage if i try a higher llc and real 1.45v i be up to mid 80s now im high 60s.
> 
> This crap was not possible before


It's not strange at all. This is what I've been saying. you want vdroop on these chips.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bcuz of the vdroop i cant find exactly the reason of it so far.... theres some weird behavior on adaptive with some voltages, theres some weird behavior on the whole thing and voltages and llc if you asked me.
> 
> If I try to set static vcore and llc6 and a set voltage let's say 1.41 so the vdroop is very minimal like 1.39v and 1.408 with the vdroop. i get a hard time on stability tests instant freezings and what not.
> 
> *But lowering the llc and having a static high vcore i get better results.*
> 
> For example LLC5, static vcore 1.45v i have a vdroop all way down to 1.39v which makes the 51x chew everything without freezings as im testing right now.
> 
> The temps im getting reflects the vdroop with the set voltage if i try a higher llc and real 1.45v i be up to mid 80s now im high 60s.
> 
> This crap was not possible before
> 
> 
> 
> It's not strange at all. This is what I've been saying. you want vdroop on these chips.
Click to expand...

Thats what im seeing now if you didnt mention it.

I was scratching my head on why. I tought i got a bad mobo from the get go. It is very weird to me still why this cpu behaves the way it do with that much of a vdroop.


----------



## feznz

Jpmboy said:


> It's not strange at all. This is what I've been saying. you want vdroop on these chips.


just I am confused why stated that both settings end up at v droop to 1.39v one is more stable than the other anyway guess it is just timed need to tune to what works


----------



## schoolofmonkey

scracy said:


> OCCT large data set stable combined with Realbench, I tend to use both and found that for my purposes its plenty stable, CPU was purchased from another member here encrypted11, he had 2 really good 8700K's and offered me one of them, obviously he kept the slightly better one for himself


All good man, was having a joke, jp got it.
I always use OCCT Small Data set to torture, I mean "stability test" my CPU's, you need a lot more voltage to get you CPU to pass that.


----------



## klepp0906

So I know this issue doesnt seem to be limited to Asus boards - but since thats what I own this is where Ill post /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif

AVX offset. I have mine set to 2. For some god awful reason my clocks oscillate between 5ghz and 4.8ghz. This happens if Im simply sitting at the desktop or even happens in games...

I can fix the issue by removing the offset. Unfortunately this means a ton more voltage for stability. 

Apparently disabling c states will stop it from behaving this way as well - however thats not an option for me. 

Whats the latest on this? I know its wide spread and has been beat to death for months, are board makers working on a bios fix or what?

Apparently its exclusive to coffee lake as per my googling /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif


----------



## SpeedyIV

*Confirm Asrock Timing Configurator works on Asus Z370*



KedarWolf said:


> If you're having trouble getting your system to post at 4266MHZ with B-Dies try higher tRFC.
> 
> If I set it at 411 I get these really great timings stable in RamTest below.
> 
> If I set it any lower really slow boot and sometimes fails into Safe Boot.
> 
> Oh, btw, I ordered G.Skill 4400 memory!!
> 
> not letting me add an attachment, internal error.


Can you confirm that the Asrock Timing Configurator does work on the Asus Maximus X Hero Wifi. I have been told that it should not work due to MCHBAR being locked in the BIOS. I think I have seen plenty of posts from people tweaking their RAM timings on Asus Z370 boards with this utility. So, just to confirm, it does work right?

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

SpeedyIV said:


> Can you confirm that the Asrock Timing Configurator does work on the Asus Maximus X Hero Wifi. I have been told that it should not work due to MCHBAR being locked in the BIOS. I think I have seen plenty of posts from people tweaking their RAM timings on Asus Z370 boards with this utility. So, just to confirm, it does work right?
> 
> Thanks


you can only see the timings with the ASTC, not change timings real time.



feznz said:


> just I am confused why stated that both settings end up at v droop to 1.39v one is more stable than the other anyway guess it is just timed need to tune to what works


possibly because the high LLC is causing high-voltage from load transients leading to instability.


----------



## GeneO

Can you change the clock timings with Asus Memtweakit on coffee lake? I tried to and it just crashes my system as soon as I hit apply.


----------



## Jpmboy

you have the real-time function enabled in bios? IN any case, it's not a useful way to test any timing change for stability since it's untrained (aligned) with other timings.


----------



## GeneO

Jpmboy said:


> you have the real-time function enabled in bios? IN any case, it's not a useful way to test any timing change for stability since it's untrained (aligned) with other timings.


Yes, I had it enabled. Yeah., I was just trying to change the command rate.


----------



## feznz

zGunBLADEz said:


> I never use xmp as it tends to go ballistic on the voltages. I prefer old school ways but it looks like i have to adapt to this vdroop this time. I dont like the vdroop looks weird to me lol static means static and llc to get it as close to set voltage lol simple.
> 
> Having a vdroop of 0.050v+ (in my case is almost close to 0.100 look at the occt reading set vcore 1.45v vdroop all way down to 1.36V) looks very weird to me and be stable in top of that.
> 
> Thats the only way i manage to get finally super stable after the last 2 weeks of testing with a lower vcore on load even if the starting vcore point is 1.45v.
> 
> So playing with it i finally got the sweet vdroop setting for all my testings
> 
> Btw, about ur fix did the app crash on tests or what? Mine is not crashing im watching for whea errors as well.


The photos app crash was not sure but did fix it with a combination of windows updates/ some command prompt command/ app reset/and folder rest one of these above fixed the CTD with a reboot. I just panicked believing is was an OC problem 

even when I did have instability there was no WHEA errors just an instant shut down no BSOD.

I see you using adaptive which works fine for me. I cannot remember but AFAIK when using offset was when all the problems crazy temps with low voltages etc.

The actual fix was setting VCCIO AND VCCSA to 1.225v


----------



## feznz

klepp0906 said:


> So I know this issue doesnt seem to be limited to Asus boards - but since thats what I own this is where Ill post /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif
> 
> AVX offset. I have mine set to 2. For some god awful reason my clocks oscillate between 5ghz and 4.8ghz. This happens if Im simply sitting at the desktop or even happens in games...
> 
> I can fix the issue by removing the offset. Unfortunately this means a ton more voltage for stability.
> 
> Apparently disabling c states will stop it from behaving this way as well - however thats not an option for me.
> 
> Whats the latest on this? I know its wide spread and has been beat to death for months, are board makers working on a bios fix or what?
> 
> Apparently its exclusive to coffee lake as per my googling /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif




My 8600k doesn't really oscillate maybe slightly pretty fixed depends on the scenario though I can make it fixed by just removing the AVX and set to 5Ghz but rather leave it @5.2 with AVX of 2 this requires no more or less voltage.
I just remembered when trying for 5Ghz got it stable then just added the AVX for a total of 5.2Ghz touched no other settings.

chances are that your CPU is only stable @ 4.8 not 5 this is why you need a ton more voltage to stabilize a fixed 5Ghz


----------



## klepp0906

feznz said:


> My 8600k doesn't really oscillate maybe slightly pretty fixed depends on the scenario though I can make it fixed by just removing the AVX and set to 5Ghz but rather leave it @5.2 with AVX of 2 this requires no more or less voltage.
> I just remembered when trying for 5Ghz got it stable then just added the AVX for a total of 5.2Ghz touched no other settings.
> 
> chances are that your CPU is only stable @ 4.8 not 5 this is why you need a ton more voltage to stabilize a fixed 5Ghz


not sure if we're on the same page. PC is definately stable @5GHZ. It oscillates right at the desktop. I can change the offset int he bios and watch it oscillate to the "new" offset at desktop or during games.

This has been extensively discussed all over these forums as well as reddit, oc/uk etc. Unfortunately fresh info seems to have dried up as of about a month ago.

Same as you basically, i can run 5 with a 2 offset with no change in voltage. Should i want to run 5 with a 0 offset, to be prime avx stable it requires much more voltage - a situation id like to avoid of course

my choices are basically low volts to be 5ghz -2 stable with a frequency oscillation during non avx situations or much higher volts than id like during 5gz non avx situations to be 5ghz avx stable as well.

basically LLC5 with 1.32 (1.28 under load) vs LLC6 1.29 (1.34ish under avx load) if i go the 5/5 route.

Id prefer the 5 -2 route but again, until i can get the freqency to stop dropping ot the avx offset frequency just cause, im sorta stuck.

As i said, disabling c states will stop this but not an option for me. Trying to go low heat/low energy/longevity this time around instead of pushing the envelope.

From a short thread here on the subject


HKPolice said:


> This is a bug. I tested different thread counts for Prime95 and anything below 5-6 threads will trigger the AVX offset even with a NON AVX prime95 load. Most games & apps are not using more than 4 threads, so the AVX offset is triggered all the time.
> 
> Just did a lot of testing and this bug is triggered when C-states are enabled. EIST does not affect it.
> 
> Enabling C1E will also trigger the bug but only when less than 6 threads are loading the CPU.
> The CPU will still idle @ max multiplier when in high performance power plan setting, but the multiplier DROPS when a load is applied. This is clearly buggy behavior, the multiplier should never drop when a non AVX load is applied.


----------



## Jpmboy

GeneO said:


> Yes, I had it enabled. Yeah., I was just trying to change the command rate.


if I recall correctly, CR is the one timing that would not be available to change once in the OS. Would be nice for any realtime access to timings that helped/worked. 

_____________________________________________________

Anyway, this discussion about an AVX "bug" must be peculiar to some settings being used. I do not see this non-AVX clock bin drop and I have been running an AVX offset since launch. Disable any conflict between speed step and shift - in order for speedshift to work, enable C6. use only one or the other. disable ring bin down if your MBs bios has it.


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm really disappointed with my G.Skill DDR4 4400 on my 8700k. Won't do 1T, won't do 4266MHZ, gets worse timings 2T that my 4x8GB G.Skill CL14 3200 b-die kit at 4200 so it's not just my IMC.

I get 3k less write and copy in AIDA64 as well even with better timings (and that's still not GSAT stable). 

I'm going to send it back to NewEgg saying it won't do 4400 it's rated at with XMP at BIOS defaults. I never expected it to but it's a valid reason for a return.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Jpmboy said:


> you can only see the timings with the ASTC, not change timings real time.
> 
> 
> possibly because the high LLC is causing high-voltage from load transients leading to instability.


OK thanks. I downloaded it but have never played with it. From the screen shots, I thought you could change values on the fly. A programmer I know is trying to add real time memory tweaking to his utility, and is running into access problems on Z370 due to MCHBAR being disabled. He is trying to figure out how MemTweakIt can do it.


----------



## CRJ84

*Bios updates?*

No new BIOS update since 01.02-18, anyone have any news about this?


----------



## aliquiswe

feznz said:


> I am more confused than ever 2 motherboards 2 cpus 1 set of ram I think it would be obvious that the ram itself is looking rather suspect.
> All I going to say I hope the best of luck with the Gaming 5 you are going to need it :thumb:


Whatever.

But yeah, it had seem like people have more success with G.Skill than with Corsair. Random reddit post suggested it's Samsung B-die then again looking at memory support for the Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 5 this is one of very few 3466 MHz sets which doesn't list support at 4 DIMMs so that kinda feel like it would suggest it's worse than those which are supported at 4 DIMMs right? Because obviously it's harder to make it work?

For the Z370-F Strix what I did was enable XMP and get one week of blue screens and then running memtest86, then just setting the frequency to 3000 and 3200 MHz alone which it turned out the motherboard still did other things for and then later set it to 2666 MHz instead and run at that and that worked so I didn't change anything.

Only exception was for mounting the other i7 8700K just to try if XMP worked then but it didn't and then before I shipped anything back try with the MSI Z370 Gaming M5 and there the block move test work just fine if using parallell core usage but at the sequential it always stopped after 4 seconds for whatever reason.

I asked the store if the processor could be RMAed for the Meltdown and Spectre bugs and possible Intel ME backdoors and it seem like they accepted that.

I'm unsure about the Gaming 5. The original hardware.info page suggested it could be among the better boards except for crosstalk but over at TweakTown it seemed like it did pretty bad. Kinda ordered it to see if the RAM worked flawlessly there and because Gigabyte claimed 1000+ memory kits supported and because it had the better VRM than the Ultra Gaming but also looking at TweakTown it obviously run hotter than many other VRMs and the wifi is kinda crappy at 1x1 too so I don't know.

Had I known I could return the processor before I could just had bought another i7 8700K and the Z370-F Strix again and used the ASUS cashback offer they had. Now I'm unsure whatever I should have the Gaming 5 or i7 8700K whatsoever. ASRock Z370 mini-itx one seem kinda interesting. Then again upgrading to 32 GB of RAM or adding a cheap soundcard to get better sound is a no-go there. External solution sure but it cost more. Or wait for like the Ryzen 7 2700X is also an alternative. Then again even according to AMD themselves the i7 8700K will be a bit better at games but mostly in just a few titles where it's more better and then quite similar at most of the rest. The Ryzen CPU of course have 33% more cores though. I don't know if I should expect 1700X, current 8700K or the old 1700/1700X prices for it either.

I wouldn't need any luck if I had just bought 2666 MHz RAM and the i7 8700 / i5 8400 from the beginning.

ASUS did reply to me eventually but then I had already shipped the boards back and it turned out the post lost them now we'll never know if it was just that board or whatever some other changes could had made them work (ASUS asked me for something / to do something which I obviously haven't done because I didn't had the motherboard any longer.)


----------



## feznz

klepp0906 said:


> not sure if we're on the same page. PC is definately stable @5GHZ. It oscillates right at the desktop. I can change the offset int he bios and watch it oscillate to the "new" offset at desktop or during games.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> This has been extensively discussed all over these forums as well as reddit, oc/uk etc. Unfortunately fresh info seems to have dried up as of about a month ago.
> 
> Same as you basically, i can run 5 with a 2 offset with no change in voltage. Should i want to run 5 with a 0 offset, to be prime avx stable it requires much more voltage - a situation id like to avoid of course
> 
> my choices are basically low volts to be 5ghz -2 stable with a frequency oscillation during non avx situations or much higher volts than id like during 5gz non avx situations to be 5ghz avx stable as well.
> 
> basically LLC5 with 1.32 (1.28 under load) vs LLC6 1.29 (1.34ish under avx load) if i go the 5/5 route.
> 
> Id prefer the 5 -2 route but again, until i can get the freqency to stop dropping ot the avx offset frequency just cause, im sorta stuck.
> 
> As i said, disabling c states will stop this but not an option for me. Trying to go low heat/low energy/longevity this time around instead of pushing the envelope.
> 
> From a short thread here on the subject


Again I looked I am not affected by this "AVX bug" I read the thread you linked to seems like a dead thread
seems like a CLMOS and start from scratch again.



Jpmboy said:


> if I recall correctly, CR is the one timing that would not be available to change once in the OS. Would be nice for any realtime access to timings that helped/worked.
> 
> _____________________________________________________
> 
> Anyway, this discussion about an AVX "bug" must be peculiar to some settings being used. I do not see this non-AVX clock bin drop and I have been running an AVX offset since launch. Disable any conflict between speed step and shift - in order for speedshift to work, enable C6. use only one or the other. disable ring bin down if your MBs bios has it.


I also must congratulate you on the HWbot achievements :thumb: 



KedarWolf said:


> I'm really disappointed with my G.Skill DDR4 4400 on my 8700k. Won't do 1T, won't do 4266MHZ, gets worse timings 2T that my 4x8GB G.Skill CL14 3200 b-die kit at 4200 so it's not just my IMC.
> 
> I get 3k less write and copy in AIDA64 as well even with better timings (and that's still not GSAT stable).
> 
> I'm going to send it back to NewEgg saying it won't do 4400 it's rated at with XMP at BIOS defaults. I never expected it to but it's a valid reason for a return.


Luckily you already knew what you IMC was capable of otherwise it could have been a long night.




aliquiswe said:


> Whatever.
> 
> But yeah, it had seem like people have more success with G.Skill than with Corsair. Random reddit post suggested it's Samsung B-die then again looking at memory support for the Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 5 this is one of very few 3466 MHz sets which doesn't list support at 4 DIMMs so that kinda feel like it would suggest it's worse than those which are supported at 4 DIMMs right? Because obviously it's harder to make it work?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> For the Z370-F Strix what I did was enable XMP and get one week of blue screens and then running memtest86, then just setting the frequency to 3000 and 3200 MHz alone which it turned out the motherboard still did other things for and then later set it to 2666 MHz instead and run at that and that worked so I didn't change anything.
> 
> Only exception was for mounting the other i7 8700K just to try if XMP worked then but it didn't and then before I shipped anything back try with the MSI Z370 Gaming M5 and there the block move test work just fine if using parallell core usage but at the sequential it always stopped after 4 seconds for whatever reason.
> 
> I asked the store if the processor could be RMAed for the Meltdown and Spectre bugs and possible Intel ME backdoors and it seem like they accepted that.
> 
> I'm unsure about the Gaming 5. The original hardware.info page suggested it could be among the better boards except for crosstalk but over at TweakTown it seemed like it did pretty bad. Kinda ordered it to see if the RAM worked flawlessly there and because Gigabyte claimed 1000+ memory kits supported and because it had the better VRM than the Ultra Gaming but also looking at TweakTown it obviously run hotter than many other VRMs and the wifi is kinda crappy at 1x1 too so I don't know.
> 
> Had I known I could return the processor before I could just had bought another i7 8700K and the Z370-F Strix again and used the ASUS cashback offer they had. Now I'm unsure whatever I should have the Gaming 5 or i7 8700K whatsoever. ASRock Z370 mini-itx one seem kinda interesting. Then again upgrading to 32 GB of RAM or adding a cheap soundcard to get better sound is a no-go there. External solution sure but it cost more. Or wait for like the Ryzen 7 2700X is also an alternative. Then again even according to AMD themselves the i7 8700K will be a bit better at games but mostly in just a few titles where it's more better and then quite similar at most of the rest. The Ryzen CPU of course have 33% more cores though. I don't know if I should expect 1700X, current 8700K or the old 1700/1700X prices for it either.
> 
> I wouldn't need any luck if I had just bought 2666 MHz RAM and the i7 8700 / i5 8400 from the beginning.
> 
> ASUS did reply to me eventually but then I had already shipped the boards back and it turned out the post lost them now we'll never know if it was just that board or whatever some other changes could had made them work (ASUS asked me for something / to do something which I obviously haven't done because I didn't had the motherboard any longer.)


Sorry if I was rude I am sincerely sorry you haven't sorted your ram problem out 
AFAIK the Asus Apex X is the best motherboard for memory OC this would be your best bet if you are concerned about motherboard selection 

https://hwbot.org/benchmark/memory_frequency/halloffame


----------



## Jpmboy

aliquiswe said:


> Whatever.
> 
> But yeah, it had seem like people have more success with G.Skill than with Corsair. Random reddit post suggested it's Samsung B-die then again looking at memory support for the Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 5 this is one of very few 3466 MHz sets which doesn't list support at 4 DIMMs so that kinda feel like it would suggest it's worse than those which are supported at 4 DIMMs right? Because obviously it's harder to make it work?
> 
> F
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> or the Z370-F Strix what I did was enable XMP and get one week of blue screens and then running memtest86, then just setting the frequency to 3000 and 3200 MHz alone which it turned out the motherboard still did other things for and then later set it to 2666 MHz instead and run at that and that worked so I didn't change anything.
> 
> Only exception was for mounting the other i7 8700K just to try if XMP worked then but it didn't and then before I shipped anything back try with the MSI Z370 Gaming M5 and there the block move test work just fine if using parallell core usage but at the sequential it always stopped after 4 seconds for whatever reason.
> 
> I asked the store if the processor could be RMAed for the Meltdown and Spectre bugs and possible Intel ME backdoors and it seem like they accepted that.
> 
> I'm unsure about the Gaming 5. The original hardware.info page suggested it could be among the better boards except for crosstalk but over at TweakTown it seemed like it did pretty bad. Kinda ordered it to see if the RAM worked flawlessly there and because Gigabyte claimed 1000+ memory kits supported and because it had the better VRM than the Ultra Gaming but also looking at TweakTown it obviously run hotter than many other VRMs and the wifi is kinda crappy at 1x1 too so I don't know.
> 
> Had I known I could return the processor before I could just had bought another i7 8700K and the Z370-F Strix again and used the ASUS cashback offer they had. Now I'm unsure whatever I should have the Gaming 5 or i7 8700K whatsoever. ASRock Z370 mini-itx one seem kinda interesting. Then again upgrading to 32 GB of RAM or adding a cheap soundcard to get better sound is a no-go there. External solution sure but it cost more. Or wait for like the Ryzen 7 2700X is also an alternative. Then again even according to AMD themselves the i7 8700K will be a bit better at games but mostly in just a few titles where it's more better and then quite similar at most of the rest. The Ryzen CPU of course have 33% more cores though. I don't know if I should expect 1700X, current 8700K or the old 1700/1700X prices for it either.
> 
> I wouldn't need any luck if I had just bought 2666 MHz RAM and the i7 8700 / i5 8400 from the beginning.
> 
> ASUS did reply to me eventually but then I had already shipped the boards back and it turned out the post lost them now we'll never know if it was just that board or whatever some other changes could had made them work (ASUS asked me for something / to do something which I obviously haven't done because I didn't had the motherboard any longer.)


there are advantages and disadvantages to running 4 sticks in a dual channel system... T-topology. You may not be able to get as high a frequency or as tight timings, but throughput with 4 slots filled can out perform 1dimm/channel. Thus was the case for x99 and is the case for x299. So... what I'm saying is, focus less on what max frequency this or that does, and actually measure performance. Latency vs bandwidth. 
Remember - XMP is not a certain thing regardless of whether or not the kit is on the QVL. CPU IMCs and dram ICs vary within the identical SKU. And to accomodate this, XMP programming is necessarily on the high side of the ranges. IMO, _AUTO VOLT_ and _XMP _are equivalent. I tend to avoid both where I can in bios.



feznz said:


> I also must congratulate you on the HWbot achievements :thumb:


thanks, but I'm not sure how I managed that. I just do ambient stuff and try to get the best efficiency. No LN2.


----------



## fvbarc

new 0612 bios ver. for rog strix 370-f


----------



## Scotty99

fvbarc said:


> new 0612 bios ver. for rog strix 370-f


Beta? Its not even listed on the bios page, you find it with internet update?


----------



## fvbarc

it is on USA site. it isn't beta


----------



## Scotty99

fvbarc said:


> it is on USA site. it isn't beta


Hmm i must be blind or ******ed, i click on support>driver and tools>bios and firmware and the latest result i see is 0607 which is the one im on. Expanding the list i only see older versions. Does it have any release notes, maybe for adaptive voltages?


----------



## fvbarc

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING/HelpDesk_Download/


----------



## Scotty99

I dunno, not on the site for me.


----------



## fvbarc

!?


----------



## fvbarc

Sorry it isn't usa site


----------



## LillaGrynet

New BIOS update for 370-A 0613 

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/PRIME-Z370-A/HelpDesk_BIOS/


----------



## apw63

After lots of testing and by using Jpmboy guide I have my 8700K OC stable. OC setting of 5Ghz Adaptive Vcore 1.376v in UEFI. AVX offest -1, Cache 47, RAM set to 3300 16 18 18 36 2T, LLC 5

When running P95 26.6 vcore droops to 1.344v (mid to upper 60sc). When running real bench\HandBrake vcore droops to 1.36v (mid to upper 60sc). Looping Valley vcore holds at 1.376v (mid to upper 40sc)


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ Nicely done! a 5.0 6c/12t processor at that voltage was a dream not long ago (4930K, 4960X, 5820K etc). Makes for a very snappy rig! :thumb:


----------



## Menthol

Jpmboy said:


> thanks, but I'm not sure how I managed that. I just do ambient stuff and try to get the best efficiency. No LN2.


Well whatever you did to manage that it's working, congrats bro


----------



## Jpmboy

Menthol said:


> Well whatever you did to manage that it's working, congrats bro


With Stinky reporting every sub along the way. :kookoo:


----------



## Menthol

Jpmboy said:


> With Stinky reporting every sub along the way. :kookoo:


That's hilarious, add another feather in your cap for irritating Stinky


----------



## feznz

Just had to check properly with this AVX "bug" so I am happy with the results not really some dips here and there but nothing to worry about I am looking no further into it. I should really delid but in real world usage.... temps are fine.
ran prime 95 ver 26.6 it is a non AVX.

maybe I should say I am stable @ 5Ghz and sometimes when the situation is right I get a bonus 5.2Ghz :thumb:


----------



## kevintuna

Motherboard model: Asus prime 370-a
UEFI Version: Version 0613
CPU: i5 8600k
Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB: F4-3600C16D-16GTZKW 16gb
GPU: gtx 1080ti ftw 3
SSD/HDDs/Optical drives: 500gb samsung 850evo, 2tb HDD
PSU: 650W gold 80 + EVGA G3
USB Devices (model/version number):
Monitor: Two 24 inch 1ms 144hz acer predators
CPU Cooler: 212 master cooler evo
PC CASE: s340 nzxt 
Operating system: Microsoft Activated yes/no? Yes, windows 10
Drivers Installed (include version): Everythings up to date
Any third Party temp/voltage software installed: no
System Overclocked (provide details)? No


I have the asus z370 boards and I'm having a hell of a time trying to get ram to rated speeds, I've memtested the ram to ensure it's good, and it is. I'm doing something wrong in the bios and it's confusing the hell out of me! XMP wont boot at all. I've made two threads detailing all information, including pictures of my entire bios. If someone could help me get my ram to it's rated speed, it would be a life saver to me at this point lol.

http://www.overclockers.com/forums/...m-higher-than-2666mhz-and-stable-on-new-build
http://www.overclock.net/forum/1805...ram-higher-than-2666mhz-stable-new-build.html

so confused!


----------



## Jpmboy

kevintuna said:


> Motherboard model: Asus prime 370-a
> UEFI Version: Version 0613
> CPU: i5 8600k
> Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB: F4-3600C16D-16GTZKW 16gb
> GPU: gtx 1080ti ftw 3
> SSD/HDDs/Optical drives: 500gb samsung 850evo, 2tb HDD
> PSU: 650W gold 80 + EVGA G3
> USB Devices (model/version number):
> Monitor: Two 24 inch 1ms 144hz acer predators
> CPU Cooler: 212 master cooler evo
> PC CASE: s340 nzxt
> Operating system: Microsoft Activated yes/no? Yes, windows 10
> Drivers Installed (include version): Everythings up to date
> Any third Party temp/voltage software installed: no
> System Overclocked (provide details)? No
> 
> 
> I have the asus z370 boards and I'm having a hell of a time trying to get ram to rated speeds, I've memtested the ram to ensure it's good, and it is. I'm doing something wrong in the bios and it's confusing the hell out of me! XMP wont boot at all. I've made two threads detailing all information, including pictures of my entire bios. If someone could help me get my ram to it's rated speed, it would be a life saver to me at this point lol.
> 
> http://www.overclockers.com/forums/...m-higher-than-2666mhz-and-stable-on-new-build
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/1805...ram-higher-than-2666mhz-stable-new-build.html
> 
> so confused!


you need to clrcmos to remove all XMP programming from the configuration. Then just set the core and cache OC as you had it, enter the XMP primary timings and voltage manually (add 25mV to the spec'd amount. so run 1.375V for a 1.35V kit). Set VCCIO to 1.225 and VSA to 1.25V. Should boot. You'll need to tune once you get the kit to post and boot successfully.


----------



## kevintuna

Jpmboy said:


> you need to clrcmos to remove all XMP programming from the configuration. Then just set the core and cache OC as you had it, enter the XMP primary timings and voltage manually (add 25mV to the spec'd amount. so run 1.375V for a 1.35V kit). Set VCCIO to 1.225 and VSA to 1.25V. Should boot. You'll need to tune once you get the kit to post and boot successfully.




I cleared cmos by resetting to defaults, I kept the core and cache OC as auto, I put the DRAM volt to 1.375, VCCIO and VS as you stated.

I set the 
DRAM CAS# Latency to 16
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay to 16
DRAM RAS# ACT TIME 36
DRAM Write Latency to 16**


I always see people posting 4 numbers for the ram timings, for mine, it's 16-16-16-36

To me, it's fairly confusing where that 4th number is coming from, I'm just guessing it's DRAM write latency, although it's much lower in the DRAM timings options.


With all that going on, no boot.

Best ive done so for is 3000mhz, with 1.1 VCCIO, 1.1 S/A, 1.35 DRAM volt, and all DRAM timings set to auto.


I can also get XMP profile to boot, if I set the ram to 3000mhz


----------



## Jpmboy

kevintuna said:


> I cleared cmos by resetting to defaults, I kept the core and cache OC as auto, I put the DRAM volt to 1.375, VCCIO and VS as you stated.
> 
> I set the
> DRAM CAS# Latency to 16
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay to 16
> DRAM RAS# ACT TIME 36
> DRAM Write Latency to 16**
> 
> 
> I always see people posting 4 numbers for the ram timings, for mine, it's 16-16-16-36
> 
> To me, it's fairly confusing where that 4th number is coming from, I'm just guessing it's DRAM write latency, although it's much lower in the DRAM timings options.
> 
> 
> With all that going on, no boot.
> 
> Best ive done so for is 3000mhz, with 1.1 VCCIO, 1.1 S/A, 1.35 DRAM volt, and all DRAM timings set to auto.
> 
> 
> I can also get XMP profile to boot, if I set the ram to 3000mhz


on this platform, RCD and RP are linked. So on z370, you will always see cas-rcd-rp with rcd and rp being the same. reset write delay to auto please. Load opt defaults and clrcmos are not quite the same. That said, reset the system and let it post to bios (hit F2). set vccio to 1.225V, vsa to 1.25V, and VDIMM to 1.375V. change nothing else. IN the dram timing menu, set cas to 16 and the next one to 16. Change nothing else. F10 to save and reboot. If it fails to post. double check the the ram sticks (best to reinsert them) make sure the CPU cooler is not over tightened (which can drastically affect ram). Other than that, it is surprising that the 3600c16 kit fails to even load XMP, so I suspect something is fouled. 
THe kit_ is_ on the QVL. 
Lastly - you do need to clrcmos to fully flush the bios to remove some parameters that you do not have access to in the bios menus.


----------



## KedarWolf

kevintuna said:


> Motherboard model: Asus prime 370-a
> UEFI Version: Version 0613
> CPU: i5 8600k
> Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB: F4-3600C16D-16GTZKW 16gb
> GPU: gtx 1080ti ftw 3
> SSD/HDDs/Optical drives: 500gb samsung 850evo, 2tb HDD
> PSU: 650W gold 80 + EVGA G3
> USB Devices (model/version number):
> Monitor: Two 24 inch 1ms 144hz acer predators
> CPU Cooler: 212 master cooler evo
> PC CASE: s340 nzxt
> Operating system: Microsoft Activated yes/no? Yes, windows 10
> Drivers Installed (include version): Everythings up to date
> Any third Party temp/voltage software installed: no
> System Overclocked (provide details)? No
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have the asus z370 boards and I'm having a hell of a time trying to get ram to rated speeds, I've memtested the ram to ensure it's good, and it is. I'm doing something wrong in the bios and it's confusing the hell out of me! XMP wont boot at all. I've made two threads detailing all information, including pictures of my entire bios. If someone could help me get my ram to it's rated speed, it would be a life saver to me at this point lol.
> 
> http://www.overclockers.com/forums/...m-higher-than-2666mhz-and-stable-on-new-build
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/1805...ram-higher-than-2666mhz-stable-new-build.html
> 
> so confused!


http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-in...memory-stability-thread-215.html#post26733073


http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-in...memory-stability-thread-206.html#post26535881


Check settings in Spoilers, try these at 4000 or 4133MHZ, good dividers, but keep your third timings on Auto and maybe try 18-18-18-36 2T or 18-19-19-37 2T. Also try 1T if 2T works. 

Alsy try DRAM Latency between 14-19 and keeping IO_Latency_offset on Auto.



I got 4000MHZ stable on my i3 8100 with my G.Skill CL14 3200 RAM.


----------



## kevintuna

KedarWolf said:


> http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-in...memory-stability-thread-215.html#post26733073
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-in...memory-stability-thread-206.html#post26535881
> 
> 
> Check settings in Spoilers, try these at 4000 or 4133MHZ, good dividers, but keep your third timings on Auto and maybe try 18-18-18-36 2T or 18-19-19-37 2T. Also try 1T if 2T works.
> 
> Alsy try DRAM Latency between 14-19 and keeping IO_Latency_offset on Auto.
> 
> 
> 
> I got 4000MHZ stable on my i3 8100 with my G.Skill CL14 3200 RAM.


Will check this after work, about to head out, thanks for the post.


----------



## kevintuna

Jpmboy said:


> on this platform, RCD and RP are linked. So on z370, you will always see cas-rcd-rp with rcd and rp being the same. reset write delay to auto please. Load opt defaults and clrcmos are not quite the same. That said, reset the system and let it post to bios (hit F2). set vccio to 1.225V, vsa to 1.25V, and VDIMM to 1.375V. change nothing else. IN the dram timing menu, set cas to 16 and the next one to 16. Change nothing else. F10 to save and reboot. If it fails to post. double check the the ram sticks (best to reinsert them) make sure the CPU cooler is not over tightened (which can drastically affect ram). Other than that, it is surprising that the 3600c16 kit fails to even load XMP, so I suspect something is fouled.
> THe kit_ is_ on the QVL.
> Lastly - you do need to clrcmos to fully flush the bios to remove some parameters that you do not have access to in the bios menus.




Weird new development, I cleared CMOS, and still didn't work. So I tied each ram individually, each ram will run to 3200 by itself. I've never gone faster than 3000 when using both at the same time. So one weird interesting thing, so as per the mother board, the ram goes in slots 1 and 3 of my mobo. I tried running both sticks of ram, and switching which ram was in slot 1 and which one was in slot 3. It will run at 3000 one way, but if I switch the ram which was in slot 3, and put that one in slot 1, both sticks wont post any faster than 2133. Unsure if I described this correctly? This seems very strange.


----------



## Jpmboy

kevintuna said:


> Weird new development, I cleared CMOS, and still didn't work. So I tied each ram individually, each ram will run to 3200 by itself. I've never gone faster than 3000 when using both at the same time. So one weird interesting thing, so as per the mother board, the ram goes in slots 1 and 3 of my mobo. I tried running both sticks of ram, and switching which ram was in slot 1 and which one was in slot 3. It will run at 3000 one way, but if I switch the ram which was in slot 3, and put that one in slot 1, both sticks wont post any faster than 2133. Unsure if I described this correctly? This seems very strange.


yeah it's getting strange, but kudos for using the manual! The sticks need to be in A2 and B2, or A1 and B1. Otherwise it will be single channel. If A2/B2 is causing issues, try A1/B1. Sometimes the A/B channels closest to the socket can be more cooperative for an overclock (and anything above 2133 is an overclock). Populating A1/A2 or B1/B2 will run in that single channel only. 
Check the thread KW linked to.


----------



## kevintuna

Jpmboy said:


> kevintuna said:
> 
> 
> 
> Weird new development, I cleared CMOS, and still didn't work. So I tied each ram individually, each ram will run to 3200 by itself. I've never gone faster than 3000 when using both at the same time. So one weird interesting thing, so as per the mother board, the ram goes in slots 1 and 3 of my mobo. I tried running both sticks of ram, and switching which ram was in slot 1 and which one was in slot 3. It will run at 3000 one way, but if I switch the ram which was in slot 3, and put that one in slot 1, both sticks wont post any faster than 2133. Unsure if I described this correctly? This seems very strange.
> 
> 
> 
> yeah it's getting strange, but kudos for using the manual! The sticks need to be in A2 and B2, or A1 and B1. Otherwise it will be single channel. If A2/B2 is causing issues, try A1/B1. Sometimes the A/B channels closest to the socket can be more cooperative for an overclock (and anything above 2133 is an overclock). Populating A1/A2 or B1/B2 will run in that single channel only. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> Check the thread KW linked to.
Click to expand...

I can't wait to get home and try the solution. I have a master evo 12 cooler and I think it may be blocking the one ram slot, but I'm not 100 percent sure. Isn't it strange that I can't achieve anything over 2133 in A2 and b2 if a certain stick is in A2, but the other stick being in a2 boots to 3000? Had me worried the actual ram may be bad.


----------



## feznz

sounds strange indeed did you try slot 2&4 
could try memtest individually with slot one since that works. to ensure it is not the ram itself
I would be checking the CPU mount not too tight and for possible bent CPU pins
but if you have done all of the other suggestion vccio and vccsa voltages manual timings etc, it could be a weak IMC


----------



## weyburn

I'm looking at buying a 8700k for gaming, i do want to overclock, but i don't want to spend $250+ for a motherboard that'll barely clock better than a $150 motherboard lol.

that being said, anyone have any suggestions on a motherboard in the $150-$200 range? thanks.



also, i won't buy it for another month, should I wait for z390?(i don't know anything about z390, trying to figure that out now) i'm trying to figure out the benefits of waiting but maybe someone here could give me some quick help too


----------



## jugs

Hey guys, I picked up a new Asus Z370-I and updated to the newest 0612 BIOS.

Started playing with OC like Jpmboy recommends in his guide. The only settings I change from defaults:

AI Overclock Tuner: Manual
CPU Core Ratio: Sync All Cores
1-Core Ratio Limit: 47
CPU/Core Cache Voltage: Manual Mode
CPU Core Voltage Override: 1.260
Ai Tweaker\DIGI+ VRM\CPU Load-Line Calibration: Level 5
Ai Tweaker\DIGI+ VRM\VPM Spread Spectrum: Disabled

When I reboot into windows on CPU-Z bench load HWiNFO64 shows my VCORE as 1.232 and my Core VID for all cores is 1.306 with a maximum instantaneous value of 1.331

Why are my VID values so much higher than my VCORE?


----------



## Scotty99

jugs said:


> Hey guys, I picked up a new Asus Z370-I and updated to the newest 0612 BIOS.
> 
> Started playing with OC like Jpmboy recommends in his guide. The only settings I change from defaults:
> 
> AI Overclock Tuner: Manual
> CPU Core Ratio: Sync All Cores
> 1-Core Ratio Limit: 47
> CPU/Core Cache Voltage: Manual Mode
> CPU Core Voltage Override: 1.260
> Ai Tweaker\DIGI+ VRM\CPU Load-Line Calibration: Level 5
> Ai Tweaker\DIGI+ VRM\VPM Spread Spectrum: Disabled
> 
> When I reboot into windows on CPU-Z bench load HWiNFO64 shows my VCORE as 1.232 and my Core VID for all cores is 1.306 with a maximum instantaneous value of 1.331
> 
> Why are my VID values so much higher than my VCORE?


Gotta disable cpu svid support. Also make sure you are reading vcore and not vid in monitoring program, those are two different values.


----------



## jugs

Scotty99 said:


> Gotta disable cpu svid support. Also make sure you are reading vcore and not vid in monitoring program, those are two different values.


Thanks for your reply Scotty99, sorry I'm new to Intel. The only SVID option I see is 'SVID Behavior' which only has Auto, Best-case, Typical, and Worst-Case scenario. No option to disable?

Edit: Changing to "Best-case Scenario" makes it work perfectly VID maxes out at 1.259.

Edit2: Nope, after some time under load it will increase the VID automagically


----------



## feznz

weyburn said:


> I'm looking at buying a 8700k for gaming, i do want to overclock, but i don't want to spend $250+ for a motherboard that'll barely clock better than a $150 motherboard lol.
> 
> that being said, anyone have any suggestions on a motherboard in the $150-$200 range? thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> also, i won't buy it for another month, should I wait for z390?(i don't know anything about z390, trying to figure that out now) i'm trying to figure out the benefits of waiting but maybe someone here could give me some quick help too


You know you are only going to be suggested anything that is Asus here  But I stuck with Asus all my life First Mobo was a Striker ii and was faulty had it replaced the only problem mobo was a P67 evo that had a double boot issue but it seems it was a P67 chipset problem and that was why a z77 chipset was released so close to the P67 I still have the Maximus 5 extreme
But I stuck with Asus ROG series because I have always had solid runs and good OC out them.



jugs said:


> Thanks for your reply Scotty99, sorry I'm new to Intel. The only SVID option I see is 'SVID Behavior' which only has Auto, Best-case, Typical, and Worst-Case scenario. No option to disable?
> 
> Edit: Changing to "Best-case Scenario" makes it work perfectly VID maxes out at 1.259.
> 
> Edit2: Nope, after some time under load it will increase the VID automagically


Did you set Ram with XMP?
to be honest we all OC differently I just started with adaptive mode as I know That was going to be my final daily OC mode so skipped the manual step.


----------



## cyan

jugs said:


> Thanks for your reply Scotty99, sorry I'm new to Intel. The only SVID option I see is 'SVID Behavior' which only has Auto, Best-case, Typical, and Worst-Case scenario. No option to disable?
> 
> Edit: Changing to "Best-case Scenario" makes it work perfectly VID maxes out at 1.259.
> 
> Edit2: Nope, after some time under load it will increase the VID automagically


The CPU SVID support option is below TPU settings on Z370-E and Hero
Hopefully it also same location for Z370-I
Disable it for manual, enable for adaptive.


----------



## Jpmboy

jugs said:


> Thanks for your reply Scotty99, sorry I'm new to Intel. The only SVID option I see is 'SVID Behavior' which only has Auto, Best-case, Typical, and Worst-Case scenario. No option to disable?
> 
> Edit: Changing to "Best-case Scenario" makes it work perfectly VID maxes out at 1.259.
> 
> Edit2: Nope, after some time under load it will increase the VID automagically


SVID does not increase the VID... that's programmed into the chip by intel. You should be looking at VCORE, not VID. You have two CPU SVID options on that board. Behavior and CPU SVID. set behavior to best case, and mode to AUTO (the bios rules will adjust for manual override or Adaptive appropriately). Then in Internal POwer, set IA AC and IA DC load line(s) to 0.01. (If you have flashed to th emost recent bios then you should not need to adj loadlines.

Remember, Adaptive (Additional Turbo Voltage) cannot be set to run a frequency below the VID for that freq... it is ADDITIONAL turbo voltage. If this is the case, best to use manual override.


----------



## jugs

Thanks for so much feedback folks, I'm about half way through this thread so hopefully my questions get a bit less stupid soon.



feznz said:


> Did you set Ram with XMP?
> to be honest we all OC differently I just started with adaptive mode as I know That was going to be my final daily OC mode so skipped the manual step.


I didn't try adaptive mode, I've just been trying to figure out manual to begin with. No XMP either, just auto RAM settings to start with.



cyan said:


> The CPU SVID support option is below TPU settings on Z370-E and Hero
> Hopefully it also same location for Z370-I
> Disable it for manual, enable for adaptive.


I'll attach screenshots, but it seems the Z370-I doesn't have the CPU SVID option, under TPU is just "Power-saving & Performance Mode", then other submenus.



Jpmboy said:


> SVID does not increase the VID... that's programmed into the chip by intel. You should be looking at VCORE, not VID. You have two CPU SVID options on that board. Behavior and CPU SVID. set behavior to best case, and mode to AUTO (the bios rules will adjust for manual override or Adaptive appropriately). Then in Internal POwer, set IA AC and IA DC load line(s) to 0.01. (If you have flashed to th emost recent bios then you should not need to adj loadlines.
> 
> Remember, Adaptive (Additional Turbo Voltage) cannot be set to run a frequency below the VID for that freq... it is ADDITIONAL turbo voltage. If this is the case, best to use manual override.


Hey Jpmboy, I am running the latest BIOS. I've tried to follow your suggestions, but it seems that the Z370-I doesn't even have the CPU SVID Mode option. I've attached my BIOS screenshots.
I'm pretty confused overall as it seems regardless of what my manually set CPU Core/Cache Voltage is, the VID is completely unrelated. With Asus MCE enabled I can set the 1.40 VCORE and see all core load of 1.290 VID, on the other hand if I disable Asus MCE @ 1.35 VCORE, I see a high of 1.331 both under cinebench.
In HWiNFO the motherboard VCORE values do seem to be correct.


----------



## Jpmboy

jugs said:


> Thanks for so much feedback folks, I'm about half way through this thread so hopefully my questions get a bit less stupid soon.
> 
> 
> I didn't try adaptive mode, I've just been trying to figure out manual to begin with. No XMP either, just auto RAM settings to start with.
> 
> 
> I'll attach screenshots, but it seems the Z370-I doesn't have the CPU SVID option, under TPU is just "Power-saving & Performance Mode", then other submenus.
> 
> 
> Hey Jpmboy, I am running the latest BIOS. I've tried to follow your suggestions, but it seems that the Z370-I doesn't even have the CPU SVID Mode option. I've attached my BIOS screenshots.
> I'm pretty confused overall as it seems regardless of what my manually set CPU Core/Cache Voltage is, the VID is completely unrelated. With Asus MCE enabled I can set the 1.40 VCORE and see all core load of 1.290 VID, on the other hand if I disable Asus MCE @ 1.35 VCORE, I see a high of 1.331 both under cinebench.
> In HWiNFO the motherboard VCORE values do seem to be correct.


Ah, seems like that board just uses the SVID auto rules for enabled or disabled (this is good, most folks unnecessarily set this off Auto). Once you select manual override (AI tuner and vcore) the VID is kinda irrelevant since you are overriding it. So, do not bother with the VID (requested voltage), monitor the vcore (delivered voltage). VID is only in play when using adaptive or offset vcore settings. Likewise with MCE, this only applies to a per core OC and really only at stock settings. When ASUS eMCE is disabled, Intel MCE controls the per core ratios. So, just leave this on auto or disabled. SVID behavior is also meaningless with Manual override.
If you looked at the guide in the OP, what was the CPUZ vcore in the first step (2 cpuz open, one running the cpuz benchmark)?


----------



## SpeedyIV

Jpmboy said:


> SVID does not increase the VID... that's programmed into the chip by intel. You should be looking at VCORE, not VID. You have two CPU SVID options on that board. Behavior and CPU SVID. set behavior to best case, and mode to AUTO (the bios rules will adjust for manual override or Adaptive appropriately). Then in Internal POwer, set IA AC and IA DC load line(s) to 0.01. (If you have flashed to th emost recent bios then you should not need to adj loadlines.
> 
> Remember, Adaptive (Additional Turbo Voltage) cannot be set to run a frequency below the VID for that freq... it is ADDITIONAL turbo voltage. If this is the case, best to use manual override.


Not to confuse the issue, but there was a post in the Z370 thread from Raja who stated "Just a note: no need to set both SVD to best case and AC/DC load line to 0.01. They both have the same function. So, if you set SVID to best case, you don't need to adjust the AC/DC load line settings because it sets the AC and DC load lines to 0.01." Jpmboy - can you confirm this?

Here is the link. It's post 1365 if the link does not jump to it.

http://www.overclock.net/forum/6-in...-official-support-thread-69.html#post26720305


----------



## Jpmboy

SpeedyIV said:


> Not to confuse the issue, but there was a post in the Z370 thread from Raja who stated "Just a note: no need to set both SVD to best case and AC/DC load line to 0.01. They both have the same function. So, if you set SVID to best case, *you don't need to adjust the AC/DC load line settings because it sets the AC and DC load lines to 0.01." Jpmboy - can you confirm this?*
> 
> Here is the link. It's post 1365 if the link does not jump to it.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/6-in...-official-support-thread-69.html#post26720305


yes - true with post launch bioses. :thumb:


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf---i7-8700k @5.1/5.0---4300Mhz-C19-18-18-33-2T---1.49v---SA 1.225v---VCCIO 1.225---StressAppTest---1 Hour
G.Skill Ripjaws 5 CL14 3200 B-Dies 4x8GB kit.

*4300MHZ on RAM, StressAppTest stable!! *


----------



## jugs

Jpmboy said:


> Ah, seems like that board just uses the SVID auto rules for enabled or disabled (this is good, most folks unnecessarily set this off Auto). Once you select manual override (AI tuner and vcore) the VID is kinda irrelevant since you are overriding it. So, do not bother with the VID (requested voltage), monitor the vcore (delivered voltage). VID is only in play when using adaptive or offset vcore settings. Likewise with MCE, this only applies to a per core OC and really only at stock settings. When ASUS eMCE is disabled, Intel MCE controls the per core ratios. So, just leave this on auto or disabled. SVID behavior is also meaningless with Manual override.
> If you looked at the guide in the OP, what was the CPUZ vcore in the first step (2 cpuz open, one running the cpuz benchmark)?


For step 1, the instantaneous maximums I see flash in CPU-Z VCORE during the CPU multi-thread bench is 1.184 V and during the single-thread bench it's up to 1.232 V.


----------



## feznz

to think I thought this chip was a dud and struggled to get 4.6 stable just a quick play after a delid though I think 1.45v is my top limit on voltage I might see how it goes [email protected] 5.5

KedarWolf I just might have to get that M.2 for the Strap bench and some B-dies nice work


----------



## Jpmboy

jugs said:


> For step 1, the instantaneous maximums I see flash in CPU-Z VCORE during the CPU multi-thread bench is 1.184 V and during the single-thread bench it's up to 1.232 V.


Should be fine. Just work from vcore and ignore VID when using manual override.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

i find out quicker to set custom 1min each test ffts in place so Small/Large/Small/Large in order Etc.... instead of random and loop that instead. i go thru the whole spectrum of ffts 3 times faster and get to catch errors faster than using stock 3min newest prime with AVX=off or 26.6 15min test each fft.




now if you guys want to do a manly test try Y-Kruncher instead lol


----------



## kevintuna

I had issues setting ram with XMP ( made a thread and posted in here ), anyways, found out what was going on. The one channel for dual channel was dead on arrival. Having the sticks in the two slots closest to CPU works fine, but then losing performance due to not being in dual channel of course.

ASUS is willing to RMA the board, i've never done this before, hope it goes well.


Asus z370 prime-a


----------



## Jpmboy

jugs said:


> For step 1, the instantaneous maximums I see flash in CPU-Z VCORE during the CPU multi-thread bench is 1.184 V and during the single-thread bench it's up to 1.232 V.


and remember that CPUZ can only report in 16mV increments. 



kevintuna said:


> I had issues setting ram with XMP ( made a thread and posted in here ), anyways, found out what was going on. The one channel for dual channel was dead on arrival. Having the sticks in the two slots closest to CPU works fine, but then losing performance due to not being in dual channel of course.
> 
> ASUS is willing to RMA the board, i've never done this before, hope it goes well.
> 
> Asus z370 prime-a


Good detective work!


----------



## kevintuna

Jpmboy said:


> and remember that CPUZ can only report in 16mV increments.
> 
> 
> Good detective work!


Ever heard of this issue happening?

I can't take the credit for the detective work, I actually met someone on an overclock forum who is from the same small town as myself!

here's the thread about it, probably worth the read for the laughs!

http://www.overclockers.com/forums/...m-higher-than-2666mhz-and-stable-on-new-build


----------



## jugs

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah - I had a 4x8GB 4266c17 kit a week ago, RGB and all (ugh). I couldn't say they were better vs the 4400c19 and sent em back. the 4266c17 1.45V, and 4400c19 1.4V kits seem to be the same ICs (only used 2 sticks on this APEX). I really was more interested in how they would do on x299. Didn't do any better than the 2 kits of 2x8GB 3600c15 I've had since launch. But damn, DDR4 prices are ridiculous right now. Never should have sold the spare kits I had.


Hey Jpmboy,

I'm looking to pick up some new b-die for my 8700k. I was looking at the 3600c15 you're talking about as well as the 4400c19 that you and KW bought, how well did the 3600c15 do?


----------



## KedarWolf

jugs said:


> Hey Jpmboy,
> 
> I'm looking to pick up some new b-die for my 8700k. I was looking at the 3600c15 you're talking about as well as the 4400c19 that you and KW bought, how well did the 3600c15 do?




My 2x8GB 4400 CL19 didn't do as well as my 4x8GB CL14 3200.

I couldn't do 4200MHZ on it GSAT stable but got 4300 on my CL14 3200 kit.

If you did go that kit (might save some money) I'd get the 4x8GB Trident Z CL14 3200, not the Ripjaws 5 kit.

Trident Z are binned better.

I heard someone say that got 1T out of that Trident Z kit and could only get 2T out of their Ripjaws 5 kit.

I can only do 2T on my Ripjaws 5

Plus you get 32GB instead of 16GB. 

But I might have just had poor performing DIMMs. People are getting 17-17-17-34 1T out of that 4400 kit. 


Edit: Though they are hard to find CL17 4266 G.Skill are an option as well. I couldn't find them anywhere in NA.


----------



## Albert1007

Hey Guys, another one with a Maximus X Hero here paired with a i5 8600K.

I have some problems with it (pretty sure it's cold boot but behaving in a weird manner):

When my room temp is at +/- 20C on the morning, just sometimes the first time the board fails to boot. It powers up, but just for half a second, shuts down and remains off, doesn't matter how many time I press the switch on button. I need to shut sown the PSU, wait for the onboard leds to switch off, then turn on the PSU and start the system. That time the system will be stood up in some QCode (sometimes 71, sometimes 4F...), then I have to force switch it down with the case power button, power it up again, enter the BIOS, F10 and exit, that time it works, and will keep working correctly for the whole day. 

Next day might or might not happen, no one knows, but just happens on the morning while the room is cold. And if I let the system running overnight and switch it down on the morning, it won't fail the next time it boots. 

Currently running a i5 8600K at 5Ghz @1.328V. Uncore at 4700mhz, and the RAM is running at 4000 C17-17-17-17-34 2T with 1.45V. Stability tests for everything passed. 
PSU is a Corsair HX750 Platinum, and the BIOS used is the 1003. 

Really the first time this happens to me in this way, had 6700K and 7700K systems running with no problems, had a 1700X with the C6H suffering from cold boot, but the mobo itself would restart itself to solve it, and now this happens... Really really strange :/

Any help will be much appreciated!!

A.

EDIT: Forgot to say that it happens much more commonly if the night before I was charging the phone or a powerbank with the ront USB ports, but even if I don't do it, it can happen.


----------



## [email protected]

Check which POST code it fails on. Likely memory training is failing.


----------



## Albert1007

[email protected] said:


> Check which POST code it fails on. Likely memory training is failing.


Today it was 71, other days 4F or 49, it's not just one. 

Any way to solve the memory training error?

Appreciate the help


----------



## Jpmboy

jugs said:


> Hey Jpmboy,
> 
> I'm looking to pick up some new b-die for my 8700k. I was looking at the 3600c15 you're talking about as well as the 4400c19 that you and KW bought, how well did the 3600c15 do?


if you can get the 3600c15 kit, I'd grab that. I have 3 (had 4) 2x8GB kits and they have been the better of many.  (two combined on my x299 are running [email protected] flawless. the 4400c19 kit is a good one, but I've heard that several have been "average". As KW said, 3200c14 is another good choice. My 8x8GB 3200c14 kit has been at 3400c13 on x99 for a very long time. 4 of those sticks did not do as well as tweo 2x8GB 3600c15 kits on x299. but it's always a crap shoot.



Albert1007 said:


> Hey Guys, another one with a Maximus X Hero here paired with a i5 8600K.
> 
> I have some problems with it (pretty sure it's cold boot but behaving in a weird manner):
> 
> When my room temp is at +/- 20C on the morning, just sometimes the first time the board fails to boot. It powers up, but just for half a second, shuts down and remains off, doesn't matter how many time I press the switch on button. I need to shut sown the PSU, wait for the onboard leds to switch off, then turn on the PSU and start the system. That time the system will be stood up in some QCode (sometimes 71, sometimes 4F...), then I have to force switch it down with the case power button, power it up again, enter the BIOS, F10 and exit, that time it works, and will keep working correctly for the whole day.
> 
> Next day might or might not happen, no one knows, but just happens on the morning while the room is cold. And if I let the system running overnight and switch it down on the morning, it won't fail the next time it boots.
> 
> Currently running a i5 8600K at 5Ghz @1.328V. Uncore at 4700mhz, and the RAM is running at 4000 C17-17-17-17-34 2T with 1.45V. Stability tests for everything passed.
> PSU is a Corsair HX750 Platinum, and the BIOS used is the 1003.
> 
> Really the first time this happens to me in this way, had 6700K and 7700K systems running with no problems, had a 1700X with the C6H suffering from cold boot, but the mobo itself would restart itself to solve it, and now this happens... Really really strange :/
> 
> Any help will be much appreciated!!
> 
> A.
> 
> EDIT: Forgot to say that it happens much more commonly if the night before I was charging the phone or a powerbank with the ront USB ports, but even if I don't do it, it can happen.





Albert1007 said:


> Today it was 71, other days 4F or 49, it's not just one.
> 
> *Any way to solve the memory training error?*
> 
> Appreciate the help


What ram kit?
you can increase VDIMM to like 1.475 and set the eventual VDIMM to 1.45V, increase VSA slightly, or set the ram to 17-18-18 and see if it happens again. running flat primary timings is not "routine" on this platform.


----------



## Albert1007

Jpmboy said:


> if you can get the 3600c15 kit, I'd grab that. I have 3 (had 4) 2x8GB kits and they have been the better of many.  (two combined on my x299 are running [email protected] flawless. the 4400c19 kit is a good one, but I've heard that several have been "average". As KW said, 3200c14 is another good choice. My 8x8GB 3200c14 kit has been at 3400c13 on x99 for a very long time. 4 of those sticks did not do as well as tweo 2x8GB 3600c15 kits on x299. but it's always a crap shoot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What ram kit?
> you can increase VDIMM to like 1.475 and set the eventual VDIMM to 1.45V, increase VSA slightly, or set the ram to 17-18-18 and see if it happens again. running flat primary timings is not "routine" on this platform.


My kit is the F4-3600C16D-16GTZR

I would prefer not going over 1.45V on the RAM, it's my maximum. 

Where could I find eventual VDIMM? 

Many thanks!


----------



## Jpmboy

Albert1007 said:


> My kit is the F4-3600C16D-16GTZR
> 
> I would prefer not going over 1.45V on the RAM, it's my maximum.
> 
> Where could I find eventual VDIMM?
> 
> Many thanks!


the 1.475V is training voltage, and the kit will run at 1.45. Eventual should be in the Tweakers Menu.

DL a copy of the ASrock timing configurator for z370 and post a pic. you may find that the fails happen because the RTLs and IOLs are floating around between boots.


----------



## nicros

Does ASUS ROG Z370-G have a bluetooth antenna? There's an odd single pin wire that looks like it would fit onto 1 pin on the system panel connector (pled, reset, etc.). The wire has a plastic cap on the end. Any my bluetooth range is horrible, so I'm wondering if perhaps it's the antenna. Couldn't find anything in the manual though.


----------



## Jpmboy

nicros said:


> Does ASUS ROG Z370-G have a bluetooth antenna? There's an odd single pin wire that looks like it would fit onto 1 pin on the system panel connector (pled, reset, etc.). The wire has a plastic cap on the end. Any my bluetooth range is horrible, so I'm wondering if perhaps it's the antenna. Couldn't find anything in the manual though.


the G-wifi does. If your MB IO panel looks like the picture below, it has wifi, if not... it does not.


----------



## jugs

Can you guys with the good overclocking boards like the Apex please upload the timings that come with the board like Rajas 4266? Trying to OC DRAM on the Z370-I but I have no idea on what to do with the subtimings.


----------



## KedarWolf

jugs said:


> Can you guys with the good overclocking boards like the Apex please upload the timings that come with the board like Rajas 4266? Trying to OC DRAM on the Z370-I but I have no idea on what to do with the subtimings.


I'll add my 4300MHZ timings and related settings. brb.

Actually, I loaded my 4266MHZ profile as my 4300 one needs 1.49v RAM Eventual. Even my 4266 needs 1.47v but you may be able to get away with less on an Apex. I have a Hero with 4x8GB DIMM's.

And try 17-17-17-32 1T on the Apex.


----------



## CRJ84

New bios om Asus website under Windows 8.1 64 bit, did anyone try yet? 
Version 1101 released today.


----------



## tijgert

*1st PCIe slot (x16) only works at x2 with my Aorus 1080Ti...*

•Motherboard model: Asus ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC), bios 1101.
•CPU: 8700K
•Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB: G.Skill Trident Z RGB F4-4133C17D-16GTZR (16GB)
•GPU: Gigabyte Aorus GeForce GTX 1080Ti Xtreme Edition 11G
•SSD/HDDs/Optical drives: 960 Pro 512GB
•PSU: Enermax 950W
•USB Devices (model/version number): G502/G19
•Monitor: Acer XB321HK
•CPU Cooler: EK Waterloop, custom.
•PC CASE: LianLi PC-A70
•Operating system: Microsoft Activated yes/no? W10 Pro, legit.
•Drivers Installed (include version): 391.01 (GPU)
•Any third Party temp/voltage software installed: Throttlestop/GPUz/CPUz
•System Overclocked (provide details)? during test, no. During test safe/optimized defaults in bios.

I have this pretty Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC) motherboard (Z370) paired with my Gigabyte Aorus GeForce GTX 1080Ti Xtreme Edition 11G.
The card is in the 1st PCIe slot and both parts support PCIe 3.0 speeds of x16.
The problem is that the card is stuck at x2 PCIe speeds and refuses to work at x16.

Even before hitting Windows and just checking in the bios, the bios says that the slot is running at x2 native, not x16.
The Windows install is fresh, latest drivers, but since the Bios already told me about this x2 limit I feel it's safe to assume it's not (Windows) software related.
In Windows in CPUz it says the same, running the PCIe slot at x2 only, but x16 capable.
Stressing the system with a game/benchmark doesn't up the PCIe speed, so no powersave mode afaics.
The motherboard ran bios 802, 1003 and 1101, all with the same problem.
I have not tried different videocard bioses (yet) as there are no updates available and trying non official bioses might kill something else besides my warranty.

I've reproduced this error/feature/bug on 2 of the same X Hero motherboards, so unless they're both identically broken it is not a hardware fault in the motherboard.
The videocard is fine, running at x16 in other motherboards and even x8 in the secondary PCIe slot on the Maximus X Hero, it's just stuck at x2 in the primary PCIe slot on this exact type of motherboard...

I don't like running the card in the secondary slot due to very restricted airflow, plus it's a brand new motherboard, it shouldn't be like this.

Can anybody shed some light on this?


There is one more bit of odd behavior:
I wanted to test the primary PCIe slot with some backup videocards and found they didn't give any picture at all.
An old GT220 and an Asus ENGTX560 both didn't give a picture on the monitor in the primary slot. But they worked in the secondary slot.
When I added both cards at the same time and checked the bios with the card in the secondary slot it said there was no card in the primary slot at all.
I didn't fidget with any of the PCIe settings, all vanilla.


----------



## feznz

Could be the CPU itself do you have another known good cpu to try?


----------



## GeneO

CRJ84 said:


> New bios om Asus website under Windows 8.1 64 bit, did anyone try yet?
> Version 1101 released today.


I had patched my bios with 0x84 and ran it for a week before I reverted back to 0x7C. Had no problems. Will try 1101 this weekend.


----------



## tijgert

feznz said:


> Could be the CPU itself do you have another known good cpu to try?


Alas, no backup 8700K or 8600K around. It does seem plausible... and expensive. Can this happen with a delid going wrong?


----------



## feznz

tijgert said:


> Alas, no backup 8700K or 8600K around. It does seem plausible... and expensive. Can this happen with a delid going wrong?


yes it only takes a tiny cut in the PCB to damage the circuits I cant say for 100% that is the problem but it certainly raises my suspicions I have seen bent CPU socket pins too that have had the same effect


----------



## schoolofmonkey

GeneO said:


> I had patched my bios with 0x84 and ran it for a week before I reverted back to 0x7C. Had no problems. Will try 1101 this weekend.


On the Apex page it say "Version 1101 Beta Version" with no description.
So Beta for what I don't know...


----------



## Menthol

My Apex runs so damn smooth and trouble free, not sure I want to screw with a bios update, wait that's what the second bios is for, let us know how it is betamonkey


----------



## feznz

yes typical Asus could at least put a tiny 6 word discription 
did assume the updated Bios was were the same as these ones 



[email protected] said:


> Test builds for applying negative offset to adaptive voltage (issue was due to negative offset also needing to be set for the ring domain - some Intel rule changes over previous gen, I suspect):
> 
> Maximus X Hero: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nlxq40058uyU2NL4RWx5MPcC-C8HkZ94/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Maximus X Hero WiFi: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AUrs5tu61_ixCgMGT9a4EEhLGztfgZRw/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Maximus X Formula: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oxDJEk013raeN4BYA9T2wkpZh4c2ppvm/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Maximus X Code: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yRGpk1khlkef7I-48ciXThvzI2kfLh3x/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Maximus X Apex: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nN7LZ0VW--O7lTRHHvoNS_fV9da_2p-3/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Have requested more builds for more boards.


----------



## hdtvnut

My new Hero board seems to be a success, but I haven't done any stress beyond 5-10 minutes. SL 5.2 GHz/1.425v/avx 2. 156 w TDP shoves cpu temp to 82-84 deg C.

I bought the Newegg combo Hero/Blackhawk case/750 ps, but quickly discovered the case wouldn't fit the Hero at the backplane, not to mention being too narrow for the Noctua.

Can boot at 4000 on the ram, after will run at 4133. Tried some different settings, but 19-19-19-39 seems to work best. Suggestions welcome.

Maximus X Hero WiFi
Silicon Lottery 5.2 re-lid 8700K
2x8 GB G.Skill 4266 C19
Noctua U14S double-fan (very quiet)
Samsung SM961 PCIe NVMe 512
EVGA 1080ti SC2 (replacing with FTW3 next week)
Rosewill Gold 750w ps
Rosewill GungnirX case replacing the Blackhawk


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Menthol said:


> My Apex runs so damn smooth and trouble free, not sure I want to screw with a bios update, wait that's what the second bios is for, let us know how it is betamonkey


Not this time, betamonkey took off that hat, the Apex is running too well to mess with now 
Closest thing I'm doing that messes with the system is trying to pick the best Linux distro to install on the spare 120GB ssd I picked up for about $30USD ($50AU).

Has Windows 7 installed on it last night, man that was so easy with the Apex's EZ Installer..


----------



## Menthol

I went ahead and updated bios 2 to 1101 and everything seems to react exactly as it should, basically same settings from last OC work exactly the same, don't see any negative effects what so ever
OC the same with same voltages, settings and memory bandwidth seems the same, no noticeable difference that I can tell yet

Ya the Ez installer tool works excellent, I fought changing from 7 to 10 as long as I could, dual booted for the longest time, now that I am comfortable with 10 I don't have a second boot drive anymore


----------



## reset1101

With BIOS 1101 I have finally been able to set my RAM to 3600Mhz on my Maximus X Hero and get it stable. With a bit more voltage, 1.36v instead of 1.35v. And this hasnt worked for me in the other BIOS. So happy so far.


----------



## Jpmboy

Menthol said:


> My Apex runs so damn smooth and trouble free, not sure I want to screw with a bios update, wait that's what the second bios is for, let us know how it is betamonkey


I know, right? It is just smooth and REALLY quick. Side by side with a few other rigs, things just happen so fast on the 8700K/Apex that it really is my go-to rig.
That said, I came into an x299 G9, and daaum, gigabyte's bios really needs to change. What a goofy layout!


schoolofmonkey said:


> Not this time, betamonkey took off that hat, the Apex is running too well to mess with now
> Closest thing I'm doing that messes with the system is trying to pick the best Linux distro to install on the spare 120GB ssd I picked up for about $30USD ($50AU).
> 
> Has Windows 7 installed on it last night, *man that was so easy with the Apex's EZ Installer.*.


Same here... no iso editing or driver pushes. very clean and easy!


----------



## Scotty99

Ya 8700k paired with an nvme drive is just silly responsive, honestly if this thing lasts i dont see a reason to be replacing parts til 2025. (sans GPU of course)


----------



## WiSH2oo0

How come while running Prime95 29.4 build 7 and RealBench Stress Test my CPU isn't holding my 48x multiplier that I set in bios(1101)? I have AVX offset at zero.


----------



## Jpmboy

No idea. check thermal throttling?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> Same here... no iso editing or driver pushes. very clean and easy!


I haven't found Windows 7 any faster than Windows 10, but it's sure as heck a cleaner OS to use.
Plus a few older apps and games work flawlessly (Fallout 3/New Vegas) in Windows 7, on Windows 10 crash after crash.

You just sort of miss a OS without all the junk.

I've got a old Pentium 3 and 4 coming to build a couple of Windows 98 retro machines, that should be fun.


----------



## WiSH2oo0

Jpmboy said:


> Check thermal throttling?


It will thermal throttling when max temp on all cores is 60c? I also don't see a setting in the bios called "thermal throttling" to setup a set point.


----------



## Jpmboy

WiSH2oo0 said:


> It will thermal throttling when max temp on all cores is 60c? I also don't see a setting in the bios called "thermal throttling" to setup a set point.


The board is capable of switching off this safety feature, but you should not.
use HWInfo64 while stressing, it will record if the cpu experiences and t-throttling. Need more info (like a screen shot while it's running 4.8 instead of 5.0, with HWI open). Also, bios screenshots or a bios testfile dump (cntrl-F2 while in bios>saves>usb stick)



schoolofmonkey said:


> I haven't found Windows 7 any faster than Windows 10, but it's sure as heck a cleaner OS to use.
> Plus a few older apps and games work flawlessly (Fallout 3/New Vegas) in Windows 7, on Windows 10 crash after crash.
> 
> You just sort of miss a OS without all the junk.
> 
> I've got a old Pentium 3 and 4 coming to build a couple of Windows 98 retro machines, that should be fun.


It will be! I have an old Q9300 here with Vista and 98 on sep drives.

My Apex has a w10 and w7Pro install and there are certain ops that work better on either. W7 is there for benching mainly.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> It will be! I have an old Q9300 here with Vista and 98 on sep drives.
> 
> My Apex has a w10 and w7Pro install and there are certain ops that work better on either. W7 is there for benching mainly.


Oh man I remember my Q9550/Asus P5Q setup, I regret selling it now, awesome CPU for it's time.
I have noticed some of the benchmarks are getting better scores in Windows 7, I did a seriously cut down Nlite install though, worked fine with the EZ Installer.


----------



## SaintsEnd

Hey guys, I have an Asus Maximus Formula X board here with the most recent bios trying to install windows onto a Raid 0x2 samsung 500gb 850s but everytime I get into installing windows a compatible device driver is asked for and every time I have attempted to load intels F6 RST controller it gives me the message: "No new devices drivers were found. Make sure the installation media contains the correct Drivers, and then click OK."

What i've done in bios:

Disable CSM

Sata Mode -> Intel RST premium with intel optain (there was no raid options for the controller)

Reboot

OS type Windows UEFI

IRST -> create raid0 for my two drives 128kb stripping


Any ideas of what to do? Im stumped after reading and researching so hopefully someone here will know.


----------



## Scotty99

schoolofmonkey said:


> I haven't found Windows 7 any faster than Windows 10, but it's sure as heck a cleaner OS to use.
> Plus a few older apps and games work flawlessly (Fallout 3/New Vegas) in Windows 7, on Windows 10 crash after crash.
> 
> You just sort of miss a OS without all the junk.
> 
> I've got a old Pentium 3 and 4 coming to build a couple of Windows 98 retro machines, that should be fun.


Fallout 3 is easy to fix in windows 10, just go into the ini files and change these two lines:
bUseThreadedAI=1
iNumHWThreads=2

I never had crashing problems with new vegas on W10 so not sure about that one.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Scotty99 said:


> Fallout 3 is easy to fix in windows 10, just go into the ini files and change these two lines:
> bUseThreadedAI=1
> iNumHWThreads=2
> 
> I never had crashing problems with new vegas on W10 so not sure about that one.


I did have a stack of mods installed though, I have the STEAM version.
Fallout 3 GOG seems fine under Windows 10.

Doesn't explain the better benchmark results under Windows 7 with the 8700k though


----------



## feznz

WiSH2oo0 said:


> How come while running Prime95 29.4 build 7 and RealBench Stress Test my CPU isn't holding my 48x multiplier that I set in bios(1101)? I have AVX offset at zero.


did you set max current draw to 255w in bios



SaintsEnd said:


> Hey guys, I have an Asus Maximus Formula X board here with the most recent bios trying to install windows onto a Raid 0x2 samsung 500gb 850s but everytime I get into installing windows a compatible device driver is asked for and every time I have attempted to load intels F6 RST controller it gives me the message: "No new devices drivers were found. Make sure the installation media contains the correct Drivers, and then click OK."
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> What i've done in bios:
> 
> Disable CSM
> 
> Sata Mode -> Intel RST premium with intel optain (there was no raid options for the controller)
> 
> Reboot
> 
> OS type Windows UEFI
> 
> IRST -> create raid0 for my two drives 128kb stripping
> 
> 
> Any ideas of what to do? Im stumped after reading and researching so hopefully someone here will know.


you need to download latest chipset drivers from intel and put on usb then manually find them during installation if I remember correctly


----------



## scracy

SaintsEnd said:


> Hey guys, I have an Asus Maximus Formula X board here with the most recent bios trying to install windows onto a Raid 0x2 samsung 500gb 850s but everytime I get into installing windows a compatible device driver is asked for and every time I have attempted to load intels F6 RST controller it gives me the message: "No new devices drivers were found. Make sure the installation media contains the correct Drivers, and then click OK."
> 
> What i've done in bios:
> 
> Disable CSM
> 
> Sata Mode -> Intel RST premium with intel optain (there was no raid options for the controller)
> 
> Reboot
> 
> OS type Windows UEFI
> 
> IRST -> create raid0 for my two drives 128kb stripping
> 
> 
> Any ideas of what to do? Im stumped after reading and researching so hopefully someone here will know.


Enable CSM screen shots of my Maximus X Formula set up with two Raid 0 arrays, this should help you out  Can you confirm whether or not UEFI 1101 shows VRM's temperature in the UEFI under the monitor tab? Also note on mine I have set up Windows as EFI boot not legacy if you are installing Windows with a retail Microsoft USB stick you wont have the option of EFI boot. Also as mentioned before when installing Windows use F6flpy driver installed on a USB stick not the whole RST package.
View attachment 180326204926.BMP


View attachment 180326205016.BMP


View attachment 180326205054.BMP


View attachment 180326205224.BMP


----------



## Phaelynar

So...anyone have a power button issue with a z370 Hero X board?

Everything from the front I/O is hooked up correctly to the pins. Push power button, nothing.

Push start button on motherboard, all boots up fine, front i/o led's light up, all components and USB headers work correctly. Power button and reset button have zero effect.

I even unhooked my front I/O power switches from my other case and plugged them into this board to try and power it on, and no go. This was to test that it's not my new build's case.

It's pretty freaking weird that everything works on the build and board except the one set of pins.

I requested and got an advanced RMA approved from Newegg for the board, but if there's a way to fix it without disassembling everything I'm all ears.


----------



## Jpmboy

Phaelynar said:


> So...anyone have a power button issue with a z370 Hero X board?
> 
> Everything from the front I/O is hooked up correctly to the pins. Push power button, nothing.
> 
> Push start button on motherboard, all boots up fine, front i/o led's light up, all components and USB headers work correctly. Power button and reset button have zero effect.
> 
> I even unhooked my front I/O power switches from my other case and plugged them into this board to try and power it on, and no go. This was to test that it's not my new build's case.
> 
> It's pretty freaking weird that everything works on the build and board except the one set of pins.
> 
> I requested and got an advanced RMA approved from Newegg for the board, but if there's a way to fix it without disassembling everything I'm all ears.


the power header is basically "shorted" when the button is pressed. Your's is probably the first I've hear of that failed. :thinking:


----------



## Menthol

Short the 2 pins on the motherboard header for power (small knife, screwdriver, or piece of wire), if it starts it is not the motherboard.


----------



## Phaelynar

No clue. It's very strange. I'll have another motherboard tomorrow. All I know is I cannot get either of my cases power buttons to function, but the start button turns everything on.


----------



## KedarWolf

What kind of speeds do people get in RamTest?

If I let it run for 6 minutes it never goes under 180MB/sec and gradually creeps higher the longer I let it run.

I'm curious. I think it also depends on the speed of the drive/drives you have it on. I have it on 2 960 Pro M.2's in RAID 0. Software RAID on my two M.2 ports on my Hero motherboard though. Pretty sure it uses software RAID that is.


----------



## jugs

KedarWolf said:


> What kind of speeds do people get in RamTest?
> 
> If I let it run for 6 minutes it never goes under 180MB/sec and gradually creeps higher the longer I let it run.
> 
> I'm curious. I think it also depends on the speed of the drive/drives you have it on. I have it on 2 960 Pro M.2's in RAID 0. Software RAID on my two M.2 ports on my Hero motherboard though. Pretty sure it uses software RAID that is.


There's no way I'm paying $10 for a RAM testing tool when GSAT is free. That being said, there's no way your disk has anything to do with RAM testing.


----------



## fleps

Guys, a question.

I have my Hero X still with Bios 0802 and stable 8700K @ 5Ghz using 1.385 vcore (bios, on Windows it shows 1.392), as offset / adaptive doesn't work correctly on this Bios.

My C states are enabled so the clock is lower in idle, and temperatures are very good (delided): 75C peak on stress tests, 35-40 on normal use and low 60 on any game.

Do you think is worth it to try to update to bios 1101 and use adaptive voltage so the CPU doesn't stay on this 1.39 all the time? Is this vcore too high / dangerous considering my temperatures?

The computer is so ridiculous stable that I'm afraid of touching it.

If you still recommend to update, what's the best way to bios update on these mbs, is the EZ Update inside Asus AI Suite 3 reliable?

Thanks!


----------



## Jpmboy

fleps said:


> Guys, a question.
> 
> I have my Hero X still with Bios 0802 and stable 8700K @ 5Ghz using 1.385 vcore (bios, on Windows it shows 1.392), as offset / adaptive doesn't work correctly on this Bios.
> 
> My C states are enabled so the clock is lower in idle, and temperatures are very good (delided): 75C peak on stress tests, 35-40 on normal use and low 60 on any game.
> 
> Do you think is worth it to try to update to bios 1101 and use adaptive voltage so the CPU doesn't stay on this 1.39 all the time? Is this vcore too high / dangerous considering my temperatures?
> 
> The computer is so ridiculous stable that I'm afraid of touching it.
> 
> If you still recommend to update, what's the best way to bios update on these mbs, is the EZ Update inside Asus AI Suite 3 reliable?
> 
> Thanks!


The only reason to update the bios on a rig that is working the way you want is either something related to compatibility with attached devices or a uCode update that patches an issue like Spectre/Meltdown (and you are concerned about that). Otherwise, if it aint't broke, don't try to fix it. 

If you do, either bios flashback or the EZ Flasher in bios (which I have used dozens of times without issues).


----------



## Scotty99

Thats why i like touching as little as possible for an overclock lol, i can remember 4 things but not 12 

I just went to strix-f new bios and my overclock holds with the same settings.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> Thats why i like touching as little as possible for an overclock lol, i can remember 4 things but not 12
> 
> I just went to strix-f new bios and my overclock holds with the same settings.


Yeah - tweaking for grins is fine, tho having a solid 24/7 OC is handy when things need to get done.


----------



## Scotty99

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah - tweaking for grins is fine, tho having a solid 24/7 OC is handy when things need to get done.


Suggesting my system isnt stable is quite cute, given i am the guy who recommends people have HWinfo open on their PC to check for whea's daily  (as that is how you check for actual stability, not a program that you use once lol)

Anywho...have a good one JPM.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> *Suggesting my system isnt stable is quite cute*, given i am the guy who recommends people have HWinfo open on their PC to check for whea's daily  (as that is how you check for actual stability, not a program that you use once lol)
> 
> Anywho...have a good one JPM.


lol - I did? :eh-smiley


----------



## Scotty99

Jpmboy said:


> lol - I did? :eh-smiley


Maybe i read it wrong? It sounded like you were suggesting minimal tweaks for an overclock is an unsuitable method for a 24/7 setup. In my experience the less stuff you mess with the better, at least for recent platforms. Back in the x58 days you actually had to change voltages that werent related to Vcore to get a system stable, ever since sandy bridge tho things are straight forward.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> Maybe i read it wrong? It sounded like you were suggesting minimal tweaks for an overclock is an unsuitable method for a 24/7 setup. In my experience the less stuff you mess with the better, at least for recent platforms. Back in the x58 days you actually had to change voltages that werent related to Vcore to get a system stable, ever since sandy bridge tho things are straight forward.


I was trying to say that tweaking for fun is... fun. That said, having a solid OC to "restore" is a good thing.
... and unfortunately, there remain to be voltages that can need tweaking that aren't directly related to vcore. :thumb:


----------



## Scotty99

My experience with that last part has been different, ever since sandy every PC ive messed around with ive only had to set XMP and change multi/vcore/llc and power restrictions. Then again i usually dont buy the craziest ram on the market as i have never seen real world benefits, only headaches from forum posters with trying to get it stable.

I dont know how on earth someone could find ram tweaking fun, but to each their own i suppose.


----------



## feznz

I would agree but for some it is so much more of a challenge to OC Ram than a CPU


----------



## feznz

https://valid.x86.fr/ualk77

I see that cpuz validator will see if your CPU has the updated micro code to prevent spectre so gave me reason to try bios 1101 
All I can say it is way better than 1003 takes .01v less to stabilise the same CPU clock and patched for Spectre/Meltdown


----------



## Scotty99

Oh that is cool, apparently mine is patched:
https://valid.x86.fr/14vvjq


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Scotty99 said:


> Oh that is cool, apparently mine is patched:
> https://valid.x86.fr/14vvjq


Explain this on the Apex "Spectre (CVE-2017-5715) Vulnerable"
https://valid.x86.fr/wqmtkn

Now this happened on the 1003 and the 1101 BIOS's...

CPUz or bug in the Apex BIOS?


----------



## Scotty99

Being a more oddball motherboard than a mainstream strix maybe it hasnt got the spectre stuff yet? Or like you said could just be a bug.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Scotty99 said:


> Being a more oddball motherboard than a mainstream strix maybe it hasnt got the spectre stuff yet? Or like you said could just be a bug.


You think with the latest 1101 BIOS it would of been patched, strange it was overlooked.

And yet InSpectre says it's safe


----------



## Scotty99

Likely cpu-z bug then 

Think its about time i start looking for a GPU replacement, sold my 1080ti strix back a couple months ago for 1100 and GPU prices are coming back down on craigslist, 1080's popping up for 450 range.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Scotty99 said:


> Likely cpu-z bug then
> 
> Think its about time i start looking for a GPU replacement, sold my 1080ti strix back a couple months ago for 1100 and GPU prices are coming back down on craigslist, 1080's popping up for 450 range.


You know I thought about doing the same, I bought my GTX1080ti Strix for $1100, they went up to $1500, thought about selling it and sitting on the money until prices come down again.
But decided too much to play and I couldn't wait...


----------



## Scotty99

I hear ya, if i didnt have a 1060 on hand i would have had to keep it.

BTW if anyone in the market for a fast monitor, dell 165hz gsync panel on sale for 329.00 today only (newegg email), its usually 400+.


----------



## feznz

schoolofmonkey said:


> You think with the latest 1101 BIOS it would of been patched, strange it was overlooked.
> 
> And yet InSpectre says it's safe


I used that program on bios 1003 it cam back as protected I was rather perplexed with the fact after reading into it the FIX required windows update AND bios update 

1003 bios vulnerable
https://valid.x86.fr/ualk77

1101 bios patched I believe the patch also requires windows to be fully up to date 
https://valid.x86.fr/dgwz6q


----------



## schoolofmonkey

feznz said:


> I used that program on bios 1003 it cam back as protected I was rather perplexed with the fact after reading into it the FIX required windows update AND bios update
> 
> 1003 bios vulnerable
> https://valid.x86.fr/ualk77
> 
> 1101 bios patched I believe the patch also requires windows to be fully up to date
> https://valid.x86.fr/dgwz6q


You're right, I did a manual updates check and Rev. 0x84 ► Spectre (CVE-2017-5715) Patched ◄

https://valid.x86.fr/44n6yi


----------



## KedarWolf

With your 8700k's at your 24/7 stable overclock settings what MB/sec are you getting in RamTest?

I get this at these settings. Never goes below 189MB/sec at 1300%.


----------



## cyan

just wondering how to setup adaptive properly with coffeelake ?
I need 1.2v manual for stable 4.7ghz, but if I set adaptive; 1.2v in the additional turbo mode cpu core voltage and set offset to minus 0.01
prime95 26.6 1344 will make vcore 1.28v instantly.
svid best behaviour, ia dc/ac load line = 0.01

on my haswell, adaptive never make 0.08v different than manual unless I use prime95 with avx.


----------



## Scotty99

Adaptive is broken on coffee lake, just have to wait until asus fixes it.


----------



## Jpmboy

cyan said:


> just wondering how to setup adaptive properly with coffeelake ?
> I need 1.2v manual for stable 4.7ghz, but if I set adaptive; 1.2v in the additional turbo mode cpu core voltage and set offset to minus 0.01
> prime95 26.6 1344 will make vcore 1.28v instantly.
> svid best behaviour, ia dc/ac load line = 0.01
> 
> on my haswell, adaptive never make 0.08v different than manual unless I use prime95 with avx.


check the coffee lake guide in my sig.


----------



## Praz

cyan said:


> just wondering how to setup adaptive properly with coffeelake ?
> I need 1.2v manual for stable 4.7ghz, but if I set adaptive; 1.2v in the additional turbo mode cpu core voltage and set offset to minus 0.01
> prime95 26.6 1344 will make vcore 1.28v instantly.
> svid best behaviour, ia dc/ac load line = 0.01
> 
> on my haswell, adaptive never make 0.08v different than manual unless I use prime95 with avx.


Hello

It is unlikely that the default VID is as low as 1.20V. When using the adaptive voltage mode the constraints imposed by Intel's programming will be followed.


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ This.

As Praz said, Adaptive can't run a vcore lower than the VID for that frequency - it's Additional Turbo Mode Voltage.
Best to deal with that using manual override.


----------



## KedarWolf

cyan said:


> just wondering how to setup adaptive properly with coffeelake ?
> I need 1.2v manual for stable 4.7ghz, but if I set adaptive; 1.2v in the additional turbo mode cpu core voltage and set offset to minus 0.01
> prime95 26.6 1344 will make vcore 1.28v instantly.
> svid best behaviour, ia dc/ac load line = 0.01
> 
> on my haswell, adaptive never make 0.08v different than manual unless I use prime95 with avx.


You need to leave SVID on Auto if you do DC/AC Load Line 0.01 or have SVID Best Behaviour and Load Line on Auto. You don't do both, it's one or the other.


----------



## Rowethren

Jpmboy said:


> ^^ This.
> 
> As Praz said, Adaptive can't run a vcore lower than the VID for that frequency - it's Additional Turbo Mode Voltage.
> Best to deal with that using manual override.



Could you use adaptive mode then set the offset to negative then put the turbo voltage higher to compensate? That should give you a lower idle/low load voltage but the same high load voltage. At least that is how it works in my head...


----------



## Jpmboy

it can work, but idle and mid clocks can be affected (turbo voltage is only applied at teh max turbo multiplier). The issue is it is not straight forward to test the lower multipliers.



KedarWolf said:


> You need to leave SVID on Auto if you do DC/AC Load Line 0.01 or have SVID Best Behaviour and Load Line on Auto. You don't do both, it's one or the other.


Correct, assuming one of the more recent bios is loaded. Otherwise, there does not seem to be a conflict if both are set.


----------



## Elric2a

Hello there.

Would you suggest manual or adaptive for :

8700k delid / maximus hero X / Aio Eisbaer 360 lt
47 @ all cores
Vcore in manual 1.225

temp max for realbench / in game : 60

i'm not intro getting a high OC but just running cores at same speed without getting to much heat !

Thanks


----------



## Rowethren

Elric2a said:


> Hello there.
> 
> Would you suggest manual or adaptive for :
> 
> 8700k delid / maximus hero X / Aio Eisbaer 360 lt
> 47 @ all cores
> Vcore in manual 1.225
> 
> temp max for realbench / in game : 60
> 
> i'm not intro getting a high OC but just running cores at same speed without getting to much heat !
> 
> Thanks


Depends on the chip but I think that is probably an undervolt so as was discussed earlier adaptive wouldn't work. 

You can use offset to have reduced variable voltage though which is what I did when I undervolted for 4.8.


----------



## Elric2a

But manual is fine?


----------



## ViTosS

Hey guys, I have some Corsair ML120 Pro 4-pin PWN fans and they are plugged direct to 4-pin headers for chassis fan in motherboard (Asus Maximus X Hero), the only options in BIOS are based on the CPU temperature, this means the fans will speed up and down according to CPU temperature, but there is a manual option where I can manually set the RPM % according to the minimum, medium and max temperature, so I set 70 to all and the temperatures I put 75ºC, this means my fans will always spin at 70% RPM, this is the only way to control PWM fans through in BIOS and have a precise RPM mode? Other than that I would need a fan controller or download softwares like Asus Ai Suite or SpeedFan?

Just want to know if I'm doing this thing right.


I used the same method to control a 3-pin old fans I had, but instead of PWM I selected DC Mode, I really don't see a point in buy PWM fans if the 3-pin have the same configuration options in BIOS than the PWM.


----------



## cyan

KedarWolf said:


> You need to leave SVID on Auto if you do DC/AC Load Line 0.01 or have SVID Best Behaviour and Load Line on Auto. You don't do both, it's one or the other.





Jpmboy said:


> it can work, but idle and mid clocks can be affected (turbo voltage is only applied at teh max turbo multiplier). The issue is it is not straight forward to test the lower multipliers.
> 
> 
> Correct, assuming one of the more recent bios is loaded. Otherwise, there does not seem to be a conflict if both are set.


I manage to get near the manual vcore by using manual LLC3 (used to be auto)
all settings still stay the same. I guess no conflict with recent bios = true
Thank you all.


----------



## scracy

ViTosS said:


> Hey guys, I have some Corsair ML120 Pro 4-pin PWN fans and they are plugged direct to 4-pin headers for chassis fan in motherboard (Asus Maximus X Hero), the only options in BIOS are based on the CPU temperature, this means the fans will speed up and down according to CPU temperature, but there is a manual option where I can manually set the RPM % according to the minimum, medium and max temperature, so I set 70 to all and the temperatures I put 75ºC, this means my fans will always spin at 70% RPM, this is the only way to control PWM fans through in BIOS and have a precise RPM mode? Other than that I would need a fan controller or download softwares like Asus Ai Suite or SpeedFan?
> 
> Just want to know if I'm doing this thing right.
> 
> 
> I used the same method to control a 3-pin old fans I had, but instead of PWM I selected DC Mode, I really don't see a point in buy PWM fans if the 3-pin have the same configuration options in BIOS than the PWM.


Here's a screen shot of how my 6x Corsair ML120's are set up with the MXF UEFI which would be similar to yours, might help


----------



## ViTosS

scracy said:


> Here's a screen shot of how my 6x Corsair ML120's are set up with the MXF UEFI which would be similar to yours, might help


Thanks for the information, can you explain what those CPU Fan Step Up and Step Down means and what they do? Also, why did you set Ignore to the CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit (and what is this Lower Limit btw)?


----------



## GAN77

Is Asus "sleep"? I am very angry. Manual, adaptive, offset voltage regulation does not work. A great stagnation of stresses. The recommendations do not help. And this is the top motherboard? X Code bios 1001/


----------



## Jpmboy

GAN77 said:


> Is Asus "sleep"? I am very angry. Manual, adaptive, offset voltage regulation does not work. A great stagnation of stresses. The recommendations do not help. And this is the top motherboard? X Code bios 1001/


Angry? No. 

post bios screenshots of your settings. Unless the board is broke, you probably have the bios set incorrectly.


----------



## KedarWolf

GAN77 said:


> Is Asus "sleep"? I am very angry. Manual, adaptive, offset voltage regulation does not work. A great stagnation of stresses. The recommendations do not help. And this is the top motherboard? X Code bios 1001/


Do you have SpeedStep enabled and do you have the Power settings in Windows set to 0% for the minimum?


----------



## encrypted11

Here's how you could enable adaptive voltage.
Source: [email protected] ROG R&D. It works from Z170 to Z370.

https://community.hwbot.org/topic/1...es-manual-offset/?tab=comments#comment-461876


----------



## Scotty99

encrypted11 said:


> Here's how you could enable adaptive voltage.
> Source: [email protected] ROG R&D. It works from Z170 to Z370.
> 
> https://community.hwbot.org/topic/1...es-manual-offset/?tab=comments#comment-461876


This has been gone over in this thread, adaptive is giving CPU's more volts than the user specify's, and negative offset in tandem with adaptive does not work properly. I know there are beta bios's out that apparently fixes this, but im waiting on a release bios this is something that should not have gone through QA.


----------



## Praz

Scotty99 said:


> This has been gone over in this thread, adaptive is giving CPU's more volts than the user specify's, and negative offset in tandem with adaptive does not work properly. I know there are beta bios's out that apparently fixes this, but im waiting on a release bios this is something that should not have gone through QA.


Hello

No issue with adaptive mode here (overvoltage or otherwise) on either the Z370-A or APEX.


----------



## Scotty99

Praz said:


> Hello
> 
> No issue with adaptive mode here (overvoltage or otherwise) on either the Z370-A or APEX.


 Again raja from asus already posted the beta bios's in this thread and acknowledged that negative offset was not working properly on adaptive with coffee lake, noting some change from intel they didnt account for with release bios versions. 

That's wonderful if yours is working fine, i was merely informing the person who was concerned about adaptive giving his cpu .08v higher than what he told it to in the bios.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> This has been gone over in this thread, adaptive is giving CPU's more volts than the user specify's, and negative offset in tandem with adaptive does not work properly. I know there are beta bios's out that apparently fixes this, but im waiting on a release bios this is something that should not have gone through QA.


A couple of things are being conflated here... Adaptive works fine - it is ADDITIONAL TURBO MODE VOLTAGE. Hence, is can't be set to deliver voltage below the VID. (which means you have a good chip - right? I'm sure we can find you an 8700K with a higher VID ).And if you are lucky enough to have a CPU with a low VID , simply use manual override to run below the VID (eg, under volt the CPU). THere is little to zero difference in overall power consumption and no effect on CPU lifetime. Some would suggest that for a 24/7 overclocked CPU, manual override is better in the (very) long run.

On this platform witrh W10, in order for things to work right, disable speedstep, enable speedshift, and have at least up to C6 enabled.


----------



## Praz

Scotty99 said:


> Again raja from asus already posted the beta bios's in this thread and acknowledged that negative offset was not working properly on adaptive with coffee lake, noting some change from intel they didnt account for with release bios versions.
> 
> That's wonderful if yours is working fine, i was merely informing the person who was concerned about adaptive giving his cpu .08v higher than what he told it to in the bios.


Hello

Intel has different requirements when determining minimum CPU voltage compared to the maximum voltage applied to the CPU. Understanding this one will not be inclined to breach this lower limit on a system that does meaningful work. As such I do not use negative offsets. As I previously wrote it is unlikely 1.20V is the Intel programmed maximum VID and in fact 1.28V is a more realistic voltage. Once SVID is enabled the user has no direct control over this upper voltage value. Understanding the architecture goes a long way to achieving stability.


----------



## Scotty99

No the problem is negative offset not working properly with adaptive voltage mode. Raja already commented this was a change by intel they did not forsee, and put out beta bios's for people to try. With kaby you could push adaptive below the VID with negative offset, i dont know where this currently stands with coffee im just waiting on a release bios that addresses it. In the meantime fixed works, but that's just a bandaid.

What i find incredibly odd about this entire conversation is people somehow assumed negative offset cant push voltage below VID in tandem with adaptive, why would you make this assumption when this could be done with kaby and haswell? The poster i am replying to is coming from a haswell setup and he was (rightfully) perplexed why his CPU was giving .08v more than what he set, something he could adjust for with negative offset on haswell.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> No the problem is negative offset not working properly with adaptive voltage mode. Raja already commented this was a change by intel they did not forsee, and put out beta bios's for people to try. With kaby you could push adaptive below the VID with negative offset, i dont know where this currently stands with coffee im just waiting on a release bios that addresses it. In the meantime fixed works, but that's just a bandaid.
> 
> *What i find incredibly odd about this entire conversation is people somehow assumed negative offset cant push voltage below VID in tandem with adaptive,* why would you make this assumption when this could be done with kaby and haswell? The poster i am replying to is coming from a haswell setup and he was (rightfully) perplexed why his CPU was giving .08v more than what he set, something he could adjust for with negative offset on haswell.


no one has made this assumption. so here's an example of negative offset working on the APEX. I posted a similar thing some time ago:

Adaptive only (1.275V in bios)
adaptive - offset (1.295-0.02V)
and a bios screen shot.


----------



## Scotty99

I dunno what to tell you man, clearly there are people having trouble with adaptive and negative offset otherwise they wouldnt be posting in here asking why adaptive is giving their CPU .08v more than what they specified. There is also the fact raja posted in here with beta bios's that addressed the negative offset+adaptive problem.

Here is the thread right here: (with the notation:issue was due to negative offset also needing to be set for the ring domain - some Intel rule changes over previous gen, I suspect)
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?96800-Maximus-X-series-amp-Strix-Z370-UEFI-updates


----------



## encrypted11

Side note, I'm wondering if this is correct as far as the item naming are concerned? 
Some trouble understanding a couple of these settings between different manufacturer BIOSes (At least for CPUPLL and VccPLL).

https://community.hwbot.org/topic/155133-asrock-z170m-ocf-funhouse/?do=findComment&comment=435147


NickShih said:


> 1.65 CPU PLL Voltage -> PLL Termination on Asus +CPU Standby on Asus
> 
> 1.4 VCCPLL -> ASUS PLL bandwidth . level 6 = 2.8volt , i suggest keep 1.4volt unless you cpu need high to avoid cold bug.
> 
> 2.22vColdBugKillerVolt -> Core PLL on Asus


----------



## Jpmboy

encrypted11 said:


> Side note, I'm wondering if this is correct as far as the item naming are concerned?
> Some trouble understanding a couple of these settings between different manufacturer BIOSes (At least for CPUPLL and VccPLL).
> 
> https://community.hwbot.org/topic/155133-asrock-z170m-ocf-funhouse/?do=findComment&comment=435147


Nick would know... but that is z170 so it may still be right.



Scotty99 said:


> I dunno what to tell you man, clearly there are people having trouble with adaptive and negative offset otherwise they wouldnt be posting in here asking why adaptive is giving their CPU .08v more than what they specified. There is also the fact raja posted in here with beta bios's that addressed the negative offset+adaptive problem.
> 
> Here is the thread right here: (with the notation:issue was due to negative offset also needing to be set for the ring domain - some Intel rule changes over previous gen, I suspect)
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?96800-Maximus-X-series-amp-Strix-Z370-UEFI-updates


yeah, I know - i linked raja's post in the OP when he first subbed it. All I can say it that the issue is not universal (obviously, since it works on the APEX).


----------



## Scotty99

If anyone is having audio problems with the strix-f uninstall the realtek drivers. Before i was getting audio desync on twitch and youtube with random crackling at times, now with the standard windows 10 driver its all fixed. Posting as ive seen a few people mention audio issues on the rog forums with this board.


----------



## Delphiwizard

*Rog base panel support?*

Hi guys, i was planning a new system this year and already have some parts for the new build, case, gpu and rog base function panel ( https://www.asus.com/be-nl/Motherboard-Accessory/ROG_Front_Base/ ).

I am now looking at cpu's and motherboards, i am looking at the Intel 8700 cpu and comparing the Maximus X formula and Maximus X code, however i don't see a connection for the rog base function panel anymore on both models.
Am i overlooking something or is there no more connectors for the panel?

Are there other socket 1151v2 motherboards that still have the rog panel connection?


----------



## GAN77

Jpmboy said:


> Angry? No.
> 
> post bios screenshots of your settings. Unless the board is broke, you probably have the bios set incorrectly.


Оnly manually correct voltage( 
Vcore in bios - 1,200V
LLC - 6
System configuration:

Acer Predator XB271HUbmiprz
Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX
Corsair Vengeance RGB 16GB DDR4 CMR16GX4M2C3600C18
SSD Samsung 960 EVO 500GB
CPU Intel Core i7-8700K 
ASUS ROG Maximus X CODE
Asus 1080 Ti Strix
Corsair H115I Pro
Corsair HX850i 850W


----------



## Jpmboy

GAN77 said:


> Оnly manually correct voltage(
> Vcore in bios - 1,200V
> LLC - 6
> System configuration:
> 
> Acer Predator XB271HUbmiprz
> Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX
> Corsair Vengeance RGB 16GB DDR4 CMR16GX4M2C3600C18
> SSD Samsung 960 EVO 500GB
> CPU Intel Core i7-8700K
> ASUS ROG Maximus X CODE
> Asus 1080 Ti Strix
> Corsair H115I Pro
> Corsair HX850i 850W


did you see this post?
http://www.overclock.net/forum/27073817-post1633.html


----------



## GAN77

Jpmboy said:


> did you see this post?
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/27073817-post1633.html


Yes, I see your post. Many thanks!
But it does not work for me.
I think apex and code have different vrm.
Settings may not apply for code. 

sorry for my English.


----------



## GAN77

Jpmboy said:


> did you see this post?
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/27073817-post1633.html


Yes, I see your post. Many thanks!
But it does not work for me.
I think apex and code have different vrm.
Settings may not apply for code. 

sorry for my English.


----------



## Scotty99

Is this thread broken? It says there are new posts but i dont see any lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

GAN77 said:


> Yes, I see your post. Many thanks!
> But it does not work for me.
> I think apex and code have different vrm.
> Settings may not apply for code.
> 
> sorry for my English.


What does not work? Negative offset? Have you set IA AC and IA DC load lines to 0.01 or selected 'CPU SVID MODE" = Best case scenario? Decrease LLC? If yes, and it still can't lower vcore at load, then with a CPU that has a low VID (don't complain  ) Manual Override is the way to go. If you are on W10, use speedshift (not speedstep) and be sure to have C-States set so that C6 is active (eg, enable all states up to c6).


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> What does not work? Negative offset? Have you set IA AC and IA DC load lines to 0.01 or selected 'CPU SVID MODE" = Best case scenario? Decrease LLC? If yes, and it still can't lower vcore at load, then with a CPU that has a low VID (don't complain  ) Manual Override is the way to go. If you are on W10, use speedshift (not speedstep) and be sure to have C-States set so that C6 is active (eg, enable all states up to c6).


I have SpeedStep enabled, Adaptive and no C States and my cores and voltages drop just fine.

And at LLC 4 my voltages drop from 1.42v to 1.38v on load.


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> I have SpeedStep enabled, Adaptive and no C States and my cores and voltages drop just fine.
> 
> And at LLC 4 my voltages drop from 1.42v to 1.38v on load.


as they should. Newtech in this and SKL-E is: Speed Shift + W10 + C6 is quicker with clock transitions... so they say. 
both use dynamic clocks and voltage.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> as they should. Newtech in this and SKL-E is: Speed Shift + W10 + C6 is quicker with clock transitions... so they say.
> both use dynamic clocks and voltage.


I know on X99 and other platforms C States off was better for having a higher stable overclock.

Is this still true?


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> I know on X99 and other platforms C States off was better for having a higher stable overclock.
> 
> Is this still true?


Yes it is, however, speedshift (not speedstep) needs the c6 comm link to the OS to work properly.


----------



## GAN77

Jpmboy said:


> What does not work? Negative offset? Have you set IA AC and IA DC load lines to 0.01 or selected 'CPU SVID MODE" = Best case scenario? Decrease LLC? If yes, and it still can't lower vcore at load, then with a CPU that has a low VID (don't complain  ) Manual Override is the way to go. If you are on W10, use speedshift (not speedstep) and be sure to have C-States set so that C6 is active (eg, enable all states up to c6).


Refined your recommendations. I can not get your result. Does not work.
I do not think the crooked hands of me(((
Stably linx 375 manual. You settings - 310(((


----------



## Jpmboy

Sorry bud. I think the language barrier is gonna be a problem. Please post bios screenshots. USB stick in any port, hit F12 on each bios page.


----------



## GAN77

Jpmboy said:


> Sorry bud. I think the language barrier is gonna be a problem. Please post bios screenshots. USB stick in any port, hit F12 on each bios page.



I will do,


Thank you for your help and advice!


----------



## marjamar

Looking for a good way to overclock my delidded 8700K. It isn't cooperating very well since I did a firmware update on the mb. I have had it as far as 5.2, but can't use it for anything much at all at that clock. I am interested in finding better tuning then I seem to be doing and I wonder if there is a guide that has more in-depth explanations on all the BIOS settings that will have both negative and positive effects on building a high clock, stable, and not overly hot overclock.

My best effort so far (which changed with the latest MB firmware update) was 5.1GHz @ 1.39v and -1 AVX. I was able to run Prime95 blend for over 2 hours before I stopped it and small FFT's for a bit over 1/2 hour before dropping a worker. Now, after this mb firmware update, it will not do either nearly as well. Been tweaking settings that I had made before this update, but my tweaker isn't tweaking too good.

I figured I should find some good reference materials and do some reading.

The mother board I bough (and wish I hadn't) is an ASUS ROG STRIX Z370-E and as mentioned, my CPU is a delidded i7-8700K. I'm cooling with a custom loop with a 360 push/pull rad so it's cooling pretty good except for the prime95 small FFT test gets up to about 85° C and can get higher if vcore gets above 1.45v or so. This MB will also VR throttle if I am not careful.

Any help is appreciated, especially if there is some published guides for my hardware I could get hold of.

Thanks.

-Rodger


----------



## Jpmboy

there really isn't any detailed guide that relays the interplay of various bios settings (tho some extreme guides portend to  )

Steve B's (sin0082) and my simple guide are linked in the OP.


----------



## Scotty99

marjamar said:


> Looking for a good way to overclock my delidded 8700K. It isn't cooperating very well since I did a firmware update on the mb. I have had it as far as 5.2, but can't use it for anything much at all at that clock. I am interested in finding better tuning then I seem to be doing and I wonder if there is a guide that has more in-depth explanations on all the BIOS settings that will have both negative and positive effects on building a high clock, stable, and not overly hot overclock.
> 
> My best effort so far (which changed with the latest MB firmware update) was 5.1GHz @ 1.39v and -1 AVX. I was able to run Prime95 blend for over 2 hours before I stopped it and small FFT's for a bit over 1/2 hour before dropping a worker. Now, after this mb firmware update, it will not do either nearly as well. Been tweaking settings that I had made before this update, but my tweaker isn't tweaking too good.
> 
> I figured I should find some good reference materials and do some reading.
> 
> The mother board I bough (and wish I hadn't) is an ASUS ROG STRIX Z370-E and as mentioned, my CPU is a delidded i7-8700K. I'm cooling with a custom loop with a 360 push/pull rad so it's cooling pretty good except for the prime95 small FFT test gets up to about 85° C and can get higher if vcore gets above 1.45v or so. This MB will also VR throttle if I am not careful.
> 
> Any help is appreciated, especially if there is some published guides for my hardware I could get hold of.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> -Rodger


Those temps are about right, no matter how good your cooling is and with a delid you will see close to 90c with avx loads and 1.4v+. Thing is thats just an unrealistic load for a PC, let cpu-z stress test run for 10 mins how hot does it get?


----------



## marjamar

Jpmboy said:


> there really isn't any detailed guide that relays the interplay of various bios settings (tho some extreme guides portend to  )
> 
> Steve B's (sin0082) and my simple guide are linked in the OP.


Thanks jpmboy. I have used all of the settings you have listed in your guild and of course a lot more, in more combos. My problem is, basically holding prime95 small FFT's for any good length of time (30 minutes my max) is not happening unless I clock down to 4.9GHz. Most likely, that's all my CPU wants to do unless I am missing something in my settings, which is what I'm hopping is the case. I like the challenge, so I suppose I will keep hitting my head against this 5GHz wall, HA.

-Rodger


----------



## marjamar

Scotty99 said:


> Those temps are about right, no matter how good your cooling is and with a delid you will see close to 90c with avx loads and 1.4v+. Thing is thats just an unrealistic load for a PC, let cpu-z stress test run for 10 mins how hot does it get?


I agree, everything looks as I think it should and have seen on numbers of overclocks I have been looking at. It does not help to push the CPU past about 85C anyways, it just runs hotter, not better. I just ran a Prime95 Blend test for about 1/2 hour, and it's fine. I could, and might, run that overnight just to see what happens. The constant hammering those repetitive small FFT's do to this CPU at 5GHz may just be more then it's going to take at that clock.

-Rodger


----------



## gammagoat

marjamar said:


> Thanks jpmboy. I have used all of the settings you have listed in your guild and of course a lot more, in more combos. My problem is, basically holding prime95 small FFT's for any good length of time (30 minutes my max) is not happening unless I clock down to 4.9GHz. Most likely, that's all my CPU wants to do unless I am missing something in my settings, which is what I'm hopping is the case. I like the challenge, so I suppose I will keep hitting my head against this 5GHz wall, HA.
> 
> -Rodger


One can chase small fft or one can run Realbench and say X264 and be happy.

My chip delidded @ 5Ghz on air(Nh-D15) without an AVX offset of 1 has been a pursuit in frustration, with really low ambients(59f) I can achieve 5Ghz AVX stability @ around 1.440 vcore.

I'd say that unless you have a low VID chip or are willing to run high vcore then its best to give up on small fft AVX and enjoy your computer for what you built it for. Of course if running small fft Prime is your thing, then run up your voltage and have at it.

Note: not being Prime95 or OCCT small fft AVX stable has caused me zero stability problems in anything I do with my computer. Nothing, nada, zip, zilch, gaming fine, browsing fine, benchmarking fine, all other stability test fine(other than OCCT small fft), no BSODS, no corruption, no erratic mouse, ect.

I personally feel that Prime95 small fft time has come and gone and it's only real use is to test cooling solutions and bragging rights.


----------



## Jpmboy

gammagoat said:


> One can chase small fft or one can run Realbench and say X264 and be happy.
> 
> My chip delidded @ 5Ghz on air(Nh-D15) without an AVX offset of 1 has been a pursuit in frustration, with really low ambients(59f) I can achieve 5Ghz AVX stability @ around 1.440 vcore.
> 
> I'd say that unless you have a low VID chip or are willing to run high vcore then its best to give up on small fft AVX and enjoy your computer for what you built it for. Of course if running small fft Prime is your thing, then run up your voltage and have at it.
> 
> *Note: not being Prime95 or OCCT small fft AVX stable has caused me zero stability problems in anything I do with my computer. Nothing, nada, zip, zilch, gaming fine, browsing fine, benchmarking fine, all other stability test fine*(other than OCCT small fft), no BSODS, no corruption, no erratic mouse, ect.
> 
> I personally feel that Prime95 small fft time has come and gone and it's only real use is to test cooling solutions and bragging rights.


^^ this. p95 is pretty meaningless for 5 years or so, unless you are hunting primes. Time to let that dinosaur fall in the tar pit.


----------



## marjamar

Ha ha to both you guys. You know, it's hard to give up the old ways don't you! Funny thing is, I agree, but it is hard to change an old dog and his old tricks. I did start using this XTU though, and I like the way I can do a bit of adjustments to test them without doing so many reboots. I have run realbench and it runs a stress test as long as I want it to. All the benchmarking software run fine as well. I'm running CPU-Z stress right now and I suppose that will be fine as well.

On another note, is BCLK overclocking being done much with the 8700K? Use to really help me in my FX CPU's.

-Rodger


----------



## marjamar

Well I found the problem. I was running the latest version of Prime95 small FFT's and no matter what I did in bios, right at 3 minutes I would have a worker quit. Been doing that since yesterday, or was it the day before... I forget. Anyway, I had updated my older version of Prime95 and so tonight I thought to try the older version again just to see. Sure enough there is something wrong with my copy of the new version, or the new version is significantly different in how it runs small FFT's. Been running for close to 45 minutes right now, and the highest CPU temps are about 74° C. I'm running at 5.05 GHz with 0 AVX @ 1.389 actual vcore under load. Tomorrow I may see about running at 5.1 GHz. Here's a print screen at about 30 minutes in the run. I feel better now.

-Rodger


----------



## Jpmboy

MOre recent versions of p95 use AVX, older ones do not. You can switch off AVX/FMA in the new versions.
Put the command into the local.txt file. This way you get rid of all bugs that have been fixed while giving you an option to test without FMA3 or AVX (FMA obviously won't work if you disable AVX). It is all explained in the undoc.txt file in your p95 folder.

CpuSupportsAVX=0 or 1
CpuSupportsFMA3=0 or 1


----------



## marjamar

Jpmboy said:


> MOre recent versions of p95 use AVX, older ones do not. You can switch off AVX/FMA in the new versions.
> Put the command into the local.txt file. This way you get rid of all bugs that have been fixed while giving you an option to test without FMA3 or AVX (FMA obviously won't work if you disable AVX). It is all explained in the undoc.txt file in your p95 folder.
> 
> CpuSupportsAVX=0 or 1
> CpuSupportsFMA3=0 or 1


The version I was using that kept dropping a worker at 3 minutes was the latest version out. This version that just finished successfully a 5-1/2 hour test using small FFT's was v.26.6.build 3. Upped the cycles for this test to 5.1GHz @ 1.434 vcore and 0 AVX and it ran max temps @ 78° C. without a hitch. Got a pretty good XTU Benchmark score too.

-Rodger


----------



## Jpmboy

marjamar said:


> The version I was using that kept dropping a worker at 3 minutes was the latest version out. This version that just finished successfully a 5-1/2 hour test using small FFT's was v.26.6.build 3. Upped the cycles for this test to 5.1GHz @ 1.434 vcore and 0 AVX and it ran max temps @ 78° C. without a hitch. Got a pretty good XTU Benchmark score too.
> 
> -Rodger


what are the version numbers for both?


----------



## marjamar

Jpmboy said:


> what are the version numbers for both?


 The one giving me a problem was the latest one I downloaded from TechPowerUp about a week ago. It's version 29.3.build 1 I think. Not absolutely sure, as I deleted that one yesterday once I seen the older one actually worked. The older one is v.26.6.build 3.

-Rodger


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah, v26.6 does not implement the AVX instruction set. No worries, very few things do. Most games limit to SSE. If youwant to test AVX stability (eg, for an offset) things like HWBOT x265 run at 4K with as many overkill "parts" as the installed ram can handle is more realistic. In this case it is not whether it errors out - tho if it does - add vcore - it is the "Correction Factor". This should be >0.995. Try 4x overkill, normal priority. You'll need to enable the HPET for this to run

in a command window or powershell type (copy-paste):

_bcdedit /set useplatformclock true
_
http://hw-museum.cz/data/hwbot/HWBOT_X265_2.2.ZIP


----------



## marjamar

AVX is new to me, since I haven't really updated my computer for years, just replaced parts. Those days were all FX stuff and the last few years of that I really haven't overclocked hardly any. Now, with this 8700K, all kinds of new (to me) things are showing up in bios, so it's a learning curve to be sure. This is why I'd like to find a good reference on everything new on this system. Perhaps there are books on this out I can find. I'll do some checking around Amazon.

So, you are saying that even thought on these last to overclocks I have AVX negative offset set to zero, it is still influencing the newer Prime95 and all software that uses AVX instructions perhaps? See, this is why I need some reference materials if I am going to learn this stuff. It would be better to systematically learn, rather then piece by piece I'd think.

Thanks for your info. Appreciate it.

-Rodger


----------



## encrypted11

Have you looked at [email protected]'s kabylake overclocking guide?
https://rog.asus.com/articles/guides/the-kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/


----------



## marjamar

encrypted11 said:


> Have you looked at [email protected]'s kabylake overclocking guide?
> https://rog.asus.com/articles/guides/the-kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/


No, but I will find it and look at it.

Thanks.

-Rodger


----------



## Jpmboy

marjamar said:


> AVX is new to me, since I haven't really updated my computer for years, just replaced parts. Those days were all FX stuff and the last few years of that I really haven't overclocked hardly any. Now, with this 8700K, all kinds of new (to me) things are showing up in bios, so it's a learning curve to be sure. This is why I'd like to find a good reference on everything new on this system. Perhaps there are books on this out I can find. I'll do some checking around Amazon.
> 
> So, you are saying that *even thought on these last to overclocks I have AVX negative offset set to zero, it is still influencing the newer Prime95 and all software that uses AVX instructions perhaps*? See, this is why I need some reference materials if I am going to learn this stuff. It would be better to systematically learn, rather then piece by piece I'd think.
> 
> Thanks for your info. Appreciate it.
> 
> -Rodger


if i understand your question, the AVX instruction set will affect peak current draw and power/watts. If you have no AVX offset (set to "0") the the cores will run AVX at the multiplier x bclk you have configured in bios. The thing is, a lot _has _changed and IMO, p95 is really not relevant on these system except for peak current and thermal stability. AVX512 (which can be enabled in the most recent version of p95, but is not an instruction set available with coffeelake) is much worse. So, unless you are actually hunting primes, or performing double precision computational work, one hour of Realbench (from ASUS) stress test and maybe a few loops of IBT will be plenty for 99% of uses. I prefer *x264v2 stresstest* over RB simply because it has no GPU component. And most importantly, ram stability is critical. see the DDR4 thread linked in my sig.


----------



## GeneO

1344/1344 still catches instabilities quickly with little impact on temperature and power draw . It is useful for that at least.


----------



## Bride

guys, an acute whining is coming from the mobo Aorus Gaming 7 when the CPU is NOT under load. Actually torturing it with CPUz or OCCT, it's disappearing... today I'm replacing my PSU Segotep 800W GP900G with a Corsair HX 1000 then we will see. Probably it isn't the cause, but at least it's a better PSU...


----------



## marjamar

Jpmboy said:


> if i understand your question, the AVX instruction set will affect peak current draw and power/watts. If you have no AVX offset (set to "0") the the cores will run AVX at the multiplier x bclk you have configured in bios. The thing is, a lot _has _changed and IMO, p95 is really not relevant on these system except for peak current and thermal stability. AVX512 (which can be enabled in the most recent version of p95, but is not an instruction set available with coffeelake) is much worse. So, unless you are actually hunting primes, or performing double precision computational work, one hour of Realbench (from ASUS) stress test and maybe a few loops of IBT will be plenty for 99% of uses. I prefer *x264v2 stresstest* over RB simply because it has no GPU component. And most importantly, ram stability is critical. see the DDR4 thread linked in my sig.


I used that disable AVX fcommand and tried small FFT's and it seems to work pretty much like the older versions of prime95. The question I still have is if AVX negative offset is set to 0 in bios, why does prime95 force the CPU to work so much harder without explicitly telling it to disable it in the local.txt file? At least I can disable it now, so that's a good thing.

Lots of tools to use and I suppose there's reason to use some of them I am not currently using. Just have to decide what I need, for what purpose I suppose.

Thanks for all the helps and explanations.

-Rodger


----------



## marjamar

Bride said:


> guys, an acute whining is coming from the mobo Aorus Gaming 7 when the CPU is NOT under load. Actually torturing it with CPUz or OCCT, it's disappearing... today I'm replacing my PSU Segotep 800W GP900G with a Corsair HX 1000 then we will see. Probably it isn't the cause, but at least it's a better PSU...


If your fans are speed controlled, could it be a low speed whine?

-Rodger


----------



## Rowethren

Interestingly I did used to agree with what you have all been saying about OCCT small and similar but recent events have changed that. I started hosting and playing Minecraft and using ultra quality shades/textures I would get WHEA every few hours (they are seriously intense on the CPU).

This was whilst I was OCCT medium stable for hours but couldn't run small for more than 15-30 minutes. However, once I was OCCT small stable the WHEA have completely stopped in Minecraft. So whilst I would agree that generally OCCT small is overkill if you are doing intensive CPU gaming for hours at a time clearly it does have a benefit. At least in my experience. 

Also, this behaviour was noticed when playing Minecraft at both my 4.8 and 5.0 settings.


----------



## Scotty99

So i thought i fixed my audio crackling issues on the strix-f by uninstalling realtek drivers but it appears i spoke too soon.

It happens in chrome only (well, any web browser), and i seems to happen more in a scenario where the audio is playing on a tab that isnt focused (browsing this forum for example with a youtube video playing). Never happens in a game, so it has to do with web browser somehow? 

Any idea what this could be? I even changed khz from 48000 to 44000 as suggested in a random forum post, but no dice.


----------



## cyan

Scotty99 said:


> So i thought i fixed my audio crackling issues on the strix-f by uninstalling realtek drivers but it appears i spoke too soon.
> 
> It happens in chrome only (well, any web browser), and i seems to happen more in a scenario where the audio is playing on a tab that isnt focused (browsing this forum for example with a youtube video playing). Never happens in a game, so it has to do with web browser somehow?
> 
> Any idea what this could be? I even changed khz from 48000 to 44000 as suggested in a random forum post, but no dice.


do you have nvidia card ? 
Try not to install HD AUDIO during driver install. some people said it fix the problem for them
Fortunately my hero doesn't have crackling sound.


----------



## Scotty99

cyan said:


> do you have nvidia card ?
> Try not to install HD AUDIO during driver install. some people said it fix the problem for them
> Fortunately my hero doesn't have crackling sound.


Its only been two minutes but im getting no crackling on a video i watched earlier today that had crackling, knock on wood lets hope it was the fix 

Thanks, ill update if anything changes.


----------



## Bride

marjamar said:


> If your fans are speed controlled, could it be a low speed whine?
> 
> -Rodger


Thanks, i made a mistake because this is the ASUS related section... looks not a fan problem


----------



## encrypted11

The crackling sounds may be a symptom to another issue. 
e.g. High DPC latency. Latencymon might identify the cause of your crackle.


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> ^^ this. p95 is pretty meaningless for 5 years or so, unless you are hunting primes. Time to let that dinosaur fall in the tar pit.


I'm coming from a Sandy Bridge platform and just built a new Coffee Lake (8700K) platform with an ASUS Maximus X Code platform. I, too, mainly use P95 back in the day. What stability test software should I be using this time?

Also, are the BIOS posted in the ASUS website usually updated/latest? If so, then 1101 is the latest for my board, correct? Any known issues I should be aware of?

Do you guys generally flash the BIOS/UEFI through USB BIOS Flashback or EZ Flash 3 (via USB or Internet)?


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> I'm coming from a Sandy Bridge platform and just built a new Coffee Lake (8700K) platform with an ASUS Maximus X Code platform. I, too, mainly use P95 back in the day. What stability test software should I be using this time?
> 
> Also, are the BIOS posted in the ASUS website usually updated/latest? If so, then 1101 is the latest for my board, correct? Any known issues I should be aware of?
> 
> Do you guys generally flash the BIOS/UEFI through USB BIOS Flashback or EZ Flash 3 (via USB or Internet)?


stability testing should be tailored to the intended use - so for example a gaming rig... 1-2h realbench, a few loops of IBT (for a high current test if needed), then HCi Memtest or RamTest which does the ram and cache. Production rigs... I'd do the same, but change/add x264v2 stability test,... or go full hog and use OCCT or p95 1344 and higher FFTs. Small FFTs are hot but not very helpful regarding stability. 
The most recent official bios release will be on the website's support page for that board. ezflash from within bios or bios flashback work fine. I use both without issue. With bios flashback, you can flash the board right OOB with just the ATX power connected and NO cpu in the socket. Check the 2 guides in the OP


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> kevindd992002 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm coming from a Sandy Bridge platform and just built a new Coffee Lake (8700K) platform with an ASUS Maximus X Code platform. I, too, mainly use P95 back in the day. What stability test software should I be using this time?
> 
> Also, are the BIOS posted in the ASUS website usually updated/latest? If so, then 1101 is the latest for my board, correct? Any known issues I should be aware of?
> 
> Do you guys generally flash the BIOS/UEFI through USB BIOS Flashback or EZ Flash 3 (via USB or Internet)?
> 
> 
> 
> stability testing should be tailored to the intended use - so for example a gaming rig... 1-2h realbench, a few loops of IBT (for a high current test if needed), then HCi Memtest or RamTest which does the ram and cache. Production rigs... I'd do the same, but change/add x264v2 stability test,... or go full hog and use OCCT or p95 1344 and higher FFTs. Small FFTs are hot but not very helpful regarding stability.
> The most recent official bios release will be on the website's support page for that board. ezflash from within bios or bios flashback work fine. I use both without issue. With bios flashback, you can flash the board right OOB with just the ATX power connected and NO cpu in the socket. Check the 2 guides in the OP
Click to expand...

Gotcha. I'll be using mine mainly for gaming. For HCI MemTest, does it matter if that runs from Windows? That's usually what I use but never tried the paid version where you can run it from boot time.

Yeah, let me give the guides in the OP a good read but I already have a good idea of both. I just don't know if you still need to do those precautions before and after BIOS flashing like loading optimized defaults, draining the power from the caps by holding the power button for 10 secs., etc.


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> Gotcha. I'll be using mine mainly for gaming. For HCI MemTest, does it matter if that runs from Windows? That's usually what I use but never tried the paid version where you can run it from boot time.
> 
> Yeah, let me give the guides in the OP a good read but I already have a good idea of both. *I just don't know if you still need to do those precautions before and after BIOS flashing like loading optimized defaults, draining the power from the caps by holding the power button for 10 secs., etc*.


flashing from defaults WITHIN bios is smart. Makes no difference with bios flashback since the board is not on (but has power). Use a fat 32 formatted USB stick with the unpacked bios file in the root. I'm not an "over the internet flasher" 

HCi is fine from windows. Check the DDR4 thread in my sig.

A very good alternative is Google Stressapp test (GSAT) run under windows Bash. Search for Windows BASH, enabling this in W10 is trivial.

then: "sudo apt-get install stressapptest" Make sure to do "sudo apt update", then "sudo apt upgrade" before running stressapptest.
for 32GB of ram:

stressapptest -W -M 28672 -s 3600 --pause_delay 7200

-W, more stressful algorithm than standard
-M, size in MegaBytes of RAM being tested, i.e. 8192 MB = 8 GB
-s, time of test in seconds, i.e. 3600 = 3600 seconds, 1 hour


----------



## marjamar

Speaking of stress/benchmark software, is anyone else having issues with the latest version of OCCT not running, just giving an error message? I was using the previous version which ran fine, but when asked to upgrade I did and this error thing started. Uninstalled, ccleaned, even cleaned my registry when my simple uninstall and reinstall didn't work. Let it send the error message to OCCT, but have not heard anything back. I suppose I will uninstall this version and see if the previous one works, but my guess is it's not going to.

-Rodger


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> flashing from defaults WITHIN bios is smart. Makes no difference with bios flashback since the board is not on (but has power). Use a fat 32 formatted USB stick with the unpacked bios file in the root. I'm not an "over the internet flasher"
> 
> HCi is fine from windows. Check the DDR4 thread in my sig.
> 
> A very good alternative is Google Stressapp test (GSAT) run under windows Bash. Search for Windows BASH, enabling this in W10 is trivial.
> 
> then: "sudo apt-get install stressapptest" Make sure to do "sudo apt update", then "sudo apt upgrade" before running stressapptest.
> for 32GB of ram:
> 
> stressapptest -W -M 28672 -s 3600 --pause_delay 7200
> 
> -W, more stressful algorithm than standard
> -M, size in MegaBytes of RAM being tested, i.e. 8192 MB = 8 GB
> -s, time of test in seconds, i.e. 3600 = 3600 seconds, 1 hour


Makes sense, thanks! I'll definitely try out BIOS flashback. It looks like it makes life so much easier. I heard that it also works for NTFS-formatted flash drives now.

Ok. I kinda know BASH because I use git when doing some PowerShell coding using Visual Studio Code, so yeah I'll definitely give that a try.


----------



## Scotty99

encrypted11 said:


> The crackling sounds may be a symptom to another issue.
> e.g. High DPC latency. Latencymon might identify the cause of your crackle.



Well i just got some more crackling on a youtube vid, downloaded latencymon and it said my system was running properly

https://imgur.com/kiHN8Tj

No idea what this could be, maybe i do actually have a faulty board. Only happens in a webbrowser which is odd, never heard any crackling in a game.


----------



## marjamar

Scotty99 said:


> Well i just got some more crackling on a youtube vid, downloaded latencymon and it said my system was running properly
> 
> https://imgur.com/kiHN8Tj
> 
> No idea what this could be, maybe i do actually have a faulty board. Only happens in a webbrowser which is odd, never heard any crackling in a game.


You know it could very easily be outside interference. All kinds of ways for that to happen, most often it is something like speaker wiring running parallel with power wires. Could be electronics that output RF close by. Is it repetitive or random? If you replay the same youtube video, does it always crackle? If it does, is it in the same places. If it's random, that would seem to indicate either an outside interference is occurring or faulty components/connections in your hardware.

You will need to try and isolate a few things. Use headphones and see if they crackle. If not, it must be something with the speaker side. Could be wiring, plugs, jacks, rear output components .vs the same for front output components. Just think logically, not randomly trying things, as you might find the problem either way, but using good troubleshooting (use to be my job 40 odd years back) technetics will speed the process along better.

And, it could just be a hardware problem with the motherboard.

Good luck and I hope you get it all working properly.

-Rodger


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> Well i just got some more crackling on a youtube vid, downloaded latencymon and it said my system was running properly
> 
> https://imgur.com/kiHN8Tj
> 
> No idea what this could be, maybe i do actually have a faulty board. Only happens in a webbrowser which is odd, never heard any crackling in a game.


ya need to run latency mon for 10 min or so while you are using the rig. 16 sec (?) is way too short if I'm reading that pic correctly. Crackle is not really a drop-out afaik, which is what LatMon would detect.
does both the front panel and rear speaker do the same?

try reinstalling the ethernet drivers


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Scotty99 said:


> Well i just got some more crackling on a youtube vid, downloaded latencymon and it said my system was running properly
> 
> https://imgur.com/kiHN8Tj
> 
> No idea what this could be, maybe i do actually have a faulty board. Only happens in a webbrowser which is odd, never heard any crackling in a game.


I got this on my z270 Hero board, ended up just buying a S.M.S.L M6 USB DAC, fixed the problem.
Haven't used the onboard on this z370 Apex or my previous x370 Srix and x299 TUF boards.


----------



## kevindd992002

@Jpmboy

I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong but I download 1101 off of ASUS's website, renamed it to M10C.cap, transferred it to the root of my USB flash drive, inserted it to the BIOS Flashback USB port in the the motherboard and pressed the USB BIOS Flashback button for three seconds until it flashes three times. Then it continues to flash for about 10 seconds or so until it stays solid (indicating that the flash process didn't push through). I'm using a Kingston 8GB flash drive that I tried formatting as FAT32 and NTFS and both failed.

Any ideas?


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> @*Jpmboy*
> 
> I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong but I download 1101 off of ASUS's website, renamed it to M10C.cap, transferred it to the root of my USB flash drive, inserted it to the BIOS Flashback USB port in the the motherboard and pressed the USB BIOS Flashback button for three seconds until it flashes three times. Then it continues to flash for about 10 seconds or so until it stays solid (indicating that the flash process didn't push through). I'm using a Kingston 8GB flash drive that I tried formatting as FAT32 and NTFS and both failed.
> 
> Any ideas?


Seems like you did exactly as the manual. Is the stick usb 2 or usb 3 (blue connector)?


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> Seems like you did exactly as the manual. Is the stick usb 2 or usb 3 (blue connector)?


It has a black connector so most probably a USB 2. I tried using an older Kingston DataTraveler 1GB flash disk and this time it worked! Sorry, the old one isn't a Kingston, it's a Transcend-branded flash disk. Does that mean USB BIOS Flashback is finicky when choosing which brand of flash drive it is compatible with? That's a bummer.

For what it's worth, EZ Flash 3 detects the M10C.cap file without any problems so that tells me that the board sees the flash disk properly but for some reason it doesn't want to make BIOS Flashback work with it.


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> It has a black connector so most probably a USB 2. *I tried using an older Kingston DataTraveler 1GB* flash disk and this time it worked! Sorry, the old one isn't a Kingston, it's a Transcend-branded flash disk. Does that mean USB BIOS Flashback is finicky when choosing which brand of flash drive it is compatible with? That's a bummer.
> 
> For what it's worth, EZ Flash 3 detects the M10C.cap file without any problems so that tells me that the board sees the flash disk properly but for some reason it doesn't want to make BIOS Flashback work with it.


so eventually, you were able to flash the bios - right?


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> so eventually, you were able to flash the bios - right?


Correct, sorry for the confusion. An older Kingston DataTraveler 1GB flash disk worked while a newer Transcend 8GB flash disk didn't.


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ cool


whoa - that's was a glitch.  Do not push a gif into the test editor!
:no-smile


----------



## kevindd992002

For water cooling loops, which headers should I be using for my rad fans and my pump? Right now, my pump is connected to the W_PUMP+ header, my two front rad fans on the CHA_FAN headers, and my three top rad fans on the CPU_FAN/CPU_OPT/H_AMP headers. 

1) With this setup, if my pump fails in the future the system will not recognize it, correct? So won't it be better to connect the pump to the CPU_FAN header directly?
2) Since my pump is PWM, is it recommended to run it at static speed or just let PWM dynamically adjust the speed off of water temperature like the other rad fans do?


----------



## fvbarc

new 0614 bios for rog strix 370 f
improve ram compatibility


----------



## Scotty99

Hmm havent seen anyone have problems with memory on this board, still waiting on the adaptive patch


----------



## GeneO

kevindd992002 said:


> For water cooling loops, which headers should I be using for my rad fans and my pump? Right now, my pump is connected to the W_PUMP+ header, my two front rad fans on the CHA_FAN headers, and my three top rad fans on the CPU_FAN/CPU_OPT/H_AMP headers.
> 
> 1) With this setup, if my pump fails in the future the system will not recognize it, correct? So won't it be better to connect the pump to the CPU_FAN header directly?
> 2) Since my pump is PWM, is it recommended to run it at static speed or just let PWM dynamically adjust the speed off of water temperature like the other rad fans do?


Not a water cooler, but don't some pumps require more current than fans? The pump header is rated at 3 amps and the fan at 1 amp. Does your pump require more than 1A?


----------



## kevindd992002

GeneO said:


> Not a water cooler, but don't some pumps require more current than fans? The pump header is rated at 3 amps and the fan at 1 amp. Does your pump require more than 1A?


Yes, I know that which is why the power of my D5 pump runs off of a molex connector. It's just the RPM and PWM pins that is connected to a motherboard. This is usually the case with most modern pumps anyway.


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> For water cooling loops, which headers should I be using for my rad fans and my pump? Right now, my pump is connected to the W_PUMP+ header, my two front rad fans on the CHA_FAN headers, and my three top rad fans on the CPU_FAN/CPU_OPT/H_AMP headers.
> 
> 1) With this setup, if my pump fails in the future the system will not recognize it, correct? So won't it be better to connect the pump to the CPU_FAN header directly?
> 2) Since my pump is PWM, is it recommended to run it at static speed or just let PWM dynamically adjust the speed off of water temperature like the other rad fans do?


1) the cpu fan header wil lonly warn you if there is no tach signal at startup. If you want to have the control/safety you describe, look to the aquacomputer aquaero + the atx interrupt. works perfectly. And the AQ6 is second to none.
2) flow rate has litttle to do with cooling (excepting very low flow rates). Best to set the d5 to an rpm and forget it. (they are variable, but flow has little effect on cooling once you are at 2LPM).

edit: lastly - these pumps will outlast this generation platform.. and probably the next 2 or 3. I've had DDC and D5 pumps running for >5 years.


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> 1) the cpu fan header wil lonly warn you if there is no tach signal at startup. If you want to have the control/safety you describe, look to the aquacomputer aquaero + the atx interrupt. works perfectly. And the AQ6 is second to none.
> 2) flow rate has litttle to do with cooling (excepting very low flow rates). Best to set the d5 to an rpm and forget it. (they are variable, but flow has little effect on cooling once you are at 2LPM).
> 
> edit: lastly - these pumps will outlast this generation platform.. and probably the next 2 or 3. I've had DDC and D5 pumps running for >5 years.


Yeah, I heard a lot of good things about the Aquaero but I don't have any extra space in my Enthoo Evolv ATX case (without doing any mods) to put that in. I guess I'll have to settle with ASUS Fan Xpert in the meantime. Can't I set some kind of an alert in Windows wherein I will get immediately notified when the pump fails while the system is running?

Yeah, I read that it's best to keep the pump speed to a static one. I consider the PWM pump I have the software-controlled version of a D5 Vario pump so all is good.

As for the thermal sensor channels in the Maximus X Code, I have three of them (T_Sensor, W_IN, and W_OUT). I was disappointed that when I checked the BIOS yesterday, only the T_Sensor channel can be set as a "basis" for your PWM curves for the devices connected to each of the headers. I'm not sure why they didn't include the W_IN and W_OUT channels as options. Is this also true in the ASUS Fan Xpert software?


----------



## Scotty99

If anyone curious about the new strix bios just installed it and the overclock sticks the same as before, at least asus is good at that part.


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> Yeah, I heard a lot of good things about the Aquaero but I don't have any extra space in my Enthoo Evolv ATX case (without doing any mods) to put that in. I guess I'll have to settle with ASUS Fan Xpert in the meantime. Can't I set some kind of an alert in Windows wherein I will get immediately notified when the pump fails while the system is running?
> 
> Yeah, I read that it's best to keep the pump speed to a static one. I consider the PWM pump I have the software-controlled version of a D5 Vario pump so all is good.
> 
> As for the thermal sensor channels in the Maximus X Code, I have three of them (T_Sensor, W_IN, and W_OUT). I was disappointed that when I checked the BIOS yesterday, only the T_Sensor channel can be set as a "basis" for your PWM curves for the devices connected to each of the headers. I'm not sure why they didn't include the W_IN and W_OUT channels as options. Is this also true in the ASUS Fan Xpert software?


Simple software like HWinfo can alert you if a fan header tach sensor (or any sensor) falls below a set level. PWM simply allows for the speed to be controlled by modulation of the 12V pulse width vs DC control which varies the voltage to control speed. There's no magic about PWM. Again, set a quiet level on the pump with 2+ LPM flow, there is zero evidence that changing flow rates affects cooling performance in a positive manner. Aquacomputer did a pretty thorough study of this. Why would you want to vary the pump speed with temperature? Think that faster flowing water cools faster in the rad? :blinksmil


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> Simple software like HWinfo can alert you if a fan header tach sensor (or any sensor) falls below a set level. PWM simply allows for the speed to be controlled by modulation of the 12V pulse width vs DC control which varies the voltage to control speed. There's no magic about PWM. Again, set a quiet level on the pump with 2+ LPM flow, there is zero evidence that changing flow rates affects cooling performance in a positive manner. Aquacomputer did a pretty thorough study of this. Why would you want to vary the pump speed with temperature? Think that faster flowing water cools faster in the rad? :blinksmil


Ok on the alert.

No, no, no. I think you misunderstood me. I agree with you on all counts. I know how PWM works (12V static voltage supply and RPM varied by PWM signal duty cycle). I never said I wanted to vary pump speed with temperature. I simply asked what your opinion on this as I wanted to know what the main reason why there are PWM pumps. I know flow rate doesn't really have significant effect on temperature too. What I said in my previous post is that you can think of a D5 PWM pump as a software-controlled D5 Vario pump. With D5 Vario pumps you can set the pump speed to 2 or 3 and leave it be. With a D5 PWM pump, you can do the same and set a horizontal PWM vs. temperature graph in your fan controller software to achieve the same.

On another note, I quickly installed Windows 10 on my new build to initially check my temps. In my old Sandy Bridge system, as long as I enable all C-states and Intel Speedstep the CPU frequency will go to lower multipliers even when High Performance mode in Power Options is selected. In this new build, I enabled all C-states, Intel Speedstep, and Intel Speedshift but the multiplier won't go below x43 if I'm on High Performance mode. I have to set it to Balanced to get the desired behavior. Any thoughts on this?


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah - disable speedstep, leave speedshift enabled and have at least up to C6 active. Shift needs the c6 comm link open for processor P-state control (speedstep does not as it is all OS based). Shift should be a quicker dynamic clock control. Check that min cache is set to auto too.


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> yeah - disable speedstep, leave speedshift enabled and have at least up to C6 active. Shift needs the c6 comm link open for processor P-state control (speedstep does not as it is all OS based). Shift should be a quicker dynamic clock control. Check that min cache is set to auto too.


Ok. And when I do all these, I can set the power profile to High Performance Mode in Windows and still see my CPU clock at idle frequencies?


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> Ok. And when I do all these, I can set the power profile to High Performance Mode in Windows and still see my CPU clock at idle frequencies?


Nope. if you select windows HP power plan the min_proc_state = 100%, it is designed that way so that it will hold the max turbo multiplier and max turbo voltage (sans vdroop since it is at idle) at all times. It's not dropping below 43x likely becasue the power plan has "active Cooling POlicy" enabled.


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> kevindd992002 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok. And when I do all these, I can set the power profile to High Performance Mode in Windows and still see my CPU clock at idle frequencies?
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. if you select windows HP power plan the min_proc_state = 100%, it is designed that way so that it will hold the max turbo multiplier and max turbo voltage (sans vdroop since it is at idle) at all times. It's not dropping below 43x likely becasue the power plan has "active Cooling POlicy" enabled.
Click to expand...

Do you have any ideas hoe my Sandy Bridge system could run at lower CPU frequencies even though HP is selected? I know how HP has its min_proc_state set to 100% but have been wondering for the longest time how this was happening on my old system.

Why is it recommended to disable Speedstep and enable Speedshift?

And is the M.2 heatsink shield for the ASUS Maximus X Code any good? I use a Samsung 960 EVO M.2 in the top slot but it still seems to run rather hot(temp1 idles at 48C and temp2 at 58C). 70C is the max operating temp for this SSD. So I'm kinda near throttling.


----------



## Scotty99

Not sure about the code but my strix idles at 36c and 53c, tho i read you shouldnt pay attention to the second temp on these evo drives. I got the 1tb version.


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> Do you have any ideas hoe my Sandy Bridge system could run at lower CPU frequencies even though HP is selected? I know how HP has its min_proc_state set to 100% but have been wondering for the longest time how this was happening on my old system.
> 
> Why is it recommended to disable Speedstep and enable Speedshift?
> 
> And is the M.2 heatsink shield for the ASUS Maximus X Code any good? I use a Samsung 960 EVO M.2 in the top slot but it still seems to run rather hot(temp1 idles at 48C and temp2 at 58C). 70C is the max operating temp for this SSD. So I'm kinda near throttling.


it not recommended... it works.  Shift is intel's new p-state control.

Sorry - no idea what you had going on with your sandy bridge. I have a 2700K running right now (security cams) and dynamic clocks and voltage are coupled when using offset or adaptive, and only clocks drop with manual override, not voltage. 

"skylake" + coffee lake and newer going forward with W10 newer versions. not applicable to Win 7.


----------



## kevindd992002

Scotty99 said:


> Not sure about the code but my strix idles at 36c and 53c, tho i read you shouldnt pay attention to the second temp on these evo drives. I got the 1tb version.


Hmm, ok. What's your ambient temp? What I read is that the 1st temp is the temp for the chips themselves and the 2nd temp is the controller temp. So if we don't monitor the 2nd temp, does that mean the throttling is only based on the 1st temp?



Jpmboy said:


> it not recommended... it works.  Shift is intel's new p-state control.
> 
> Sorry - no idea what you had going on with your sandy bridge. I have a 2700K running right now (security cams) and dynamic clocks and voltage are coupled when using offset or adaptive, and only clocks drop with manual override, not voltage.
> 
> "skylake" + coffee lake and newer going forward with W10 newer versions. not applicable to Win 7.


Ahh. What happens when you have both enabled?

With your Sandy Bridge system, which power profile are you using in Windows?


----------



## Scotty99

kevindd992002 said:


> Hmm, ok. What's your ambient temp? What I read is that the 1st temp is the temp for the chips themselves and the 2nd temp is the controller temp. So if we don't monitor the 2nd temp, does that mean the throttling is only based on the 1st temp?
> 
> 
> 
> Ahh. What happens when you have both enabled?
> 
> With your Sandy Bridge system, which power profile are you using in Windows?


I should have been more clear, temp 2 is the controller but that just runs hot always. My ambient is 73f,. whatever that is in celcius im too lazy


----------



## kevindd992002

Scotty99 said:


> I should have been more clear, temp 2 is the controller but that just runs hot always. My ambient is 73f,. whatever that is in celcius im too lazy


Right, yes I understand what you mean. My question is that if that is the case (no need to monitor the controller temp), then is it safe to say that throttling only happens when the memory chips (not the controller) get too hot (around 70C and up)?

73F = 22C and that says a lot. My ambient temp is 31C, lol! You get 36C for temp1 and I get 48C. So that means I get pretty much normal/expected temps based on my ambient temp, right?


----------



## Scotty99

kevindd992002 said:


> Right, yes I understand what you mean. My question is that if that is the case (no need to monitor the controller temp), then is it safe to say that throttling only happens when the memory chips (not the controller) get too hot (around 70C and up)?
> 
> 73F = 22C and that says a lot. My ambient temp is 31C, lol! You get 36C for temp1 and I get 48C. So that means I get pretty much normal/expected temps based on my ambient temp, right?


Yep looks about right. 

Also window air conditioners are a thing


----------



## kevindd992002

Scotty99 said:


> Yep looks about right.
> 
> Also window air conditioners are a thing


Do you have a link to the post/article explaining why we don't need to be concerned about temp2?

Yeah, it's just that I'm getting a baseline when my air conditioner isn't turned on. It's not like I have my AC turned on 24/7  Usually, we only turn it on during the night.


----------



## Scotty99

kevindd992002 said:


> Do you have a link to the post/article explaining why we don't need to be concerned about temp2?
> 
> Yeah, it's just that I'm getting a baseline when my air conditioner isn't turned on. It's not like I have my AC turned on 24/7  Usually, we only turn it on during the night.


I probably worded that wrong, its not that you should ignore temp 2 but that is the one that is going to usually be hotter than 1 because its always active. Either way your temps are a non concern, i dont think these things throttle til 100c and once you get them under a heatink like these asus boards have there is zero chance they will ever hit that.


----------



## GAN77

kevindd992002 said:


> Why is it recommended to disable Speedstep and enable Speedshift?
> 
> And is the M.2 heatsink shield for the ASUS Maximus X Code any good? I use a Samsung 960 EVO M.2 in the top slot but it still seems to run rather hot(temp1 idles at 48C and temp2 at 58C). 70C is the max operating temp for this SSD. So I'm kinda near throttling.



My temperatures after running two tests for 960 EVO on ASUS Maximus X Code.


----------



## kevindd992002

Scotty99 said:


> I probably worded that wrong, its not that you should ignore temp 2 but that is the one that is going to usually be hotter than 1 because its always active. Either way your temps are a non concern, i dont think these things throttle til 100c and once you get them under a heatink like these asus boards have there is zero chance they will ever hit that.


I see. It's just that 70C is Samsung's rated operating temperature for this drive but I guess that's too low of a max limit.



GAN77 said:


> My temperatures after running two tests for 960 EVO on ASUS Maximus X Code.


Here's mine @ 32C ambient:










It looks like we have more or less the same temps so all good (don't mind the numbers as this is a fresh OS install without any drivers yet)


----------



## GeneO

kevindd992002 said:


> Do you have any ideas hoe my Sandy Bridge system could run at lower CPU frequencies even though HP is selected? I know how HP has its min_proc_state set to 100% but have been wondering for the longest time how this was happening on my old system.
> 
> Why is it recommended to disable Speedstep and enable Speedshift?
> 
> And is the M.2 heatsink shield for the ASUS Maximus X Code any good? I use a Samsung 960 EVO M.2 in the top slot but it still seems to run rather hot(temp1 idles at 48C and temp2 at 58C). 70C is the max operating temp for this SSD. So I'm kinda near throttling.


My 960 Pro idles at 38/48. Do you have airflow across it? Also, I thought it throttle at a higher temperature than 70c and I think that is temp1.


----------



## kevindd992002

GeneO said:


> kevindd992002 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any ideas hoe my Sandy Bridge system could run at lower CPU frequencies even though HP is selected? I know how HP has its min_proc_state set to 100% but have been wondering for the longest time how this was happening on my old system.
> 
> Why is it recommended to disable Speedstep and enable Speedshift?
> 
> And is the M.2 heatsink shield for the ASUS Maximus X Code any good? I use a Samsung 960 EVO M.2 in the top slot but it still seems to run rather hot(temp1 idles at 48C and temp2 at 58C). 70C is the max operating temp for this SSD. So I'm kinda near throttling.
> 
> 
> 
> My 960 Pro idles at 38/48. Do you have airflow across it? Also, I thought it throttle at a higher temperature than 70c and I think that is temp1.
Click to expand...

Not directly across it, no. The only airflow it gets is air from the front rad fans.

If 70C temp1 is the throttle threshold then I'm all good.


----------



## aliquiswe

How well does a dynamic mic like the Shure SM58 work with a motherboard / ASUS Strix and ROG boards?
With no pre-amp.


----------



## Scotty99

Has anyone's power plan randomly changed by itself ? 

Ive never touched it from balanced but when i opened HWinfo today clocks wouldnt move, what could cause that? Things ive done recently are bios update and i think windows updated to a new version overnight, assuming thats it. Power settings were also reset to default, like monitor was set to turn off after 15 mins and i always have that set to never.

Weird lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> Has anyone's power plan randomly changed by itself ?
> 
> Ive never touched it from balanced but when i opened HWinfo today clocks wouldnt move, what could cause that? Things ive done recently are bios update and i think windows updated to a new version overnight, assuming thats it. Power settings were also reset to default, like monitor was set to turn off after 15 mins and i always have that set to never.
> 
> Weird lol.


instability or insufficient stability when windows loads, or if it fails to load once, windows can default the powerplan to high perf mode (or set min_proc_state to 100%)... _sometimes_.


----------



## Scotty99

Hmm never heard of that happening, isnt windows default balanced? Like i said it also changed the power parameters of the monitor and hard disk (to windows defauts, 15mins/20mins).


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah - it will set a few things if windows thinks we screwing up... done it to me many times.


----------



## kevindd992002

Scotty99 said:


> I probably worded that wrong, its not that you should ignore temp 2 but that is the one that is going to usually be hotter than 1 because its always active. Either way your temps are a non concern, i dont think these things throttle til 100c and once you get them under a heatink like these asus boards have there is zero chance they will ever hit that.





kevindd992002 said:


> Hmm, ok. What's your ambient temp? What I read is that the 1st temp is the temp for the chips themselves and the 2nd temp is the controller temp. So if we don't monitor the 2nd temp, does that mean the throttling is only based on the 1st temp?
> 
> 
> 
> Ahh. What happens when you have both enabled?
> 
> With your Sandy Bridge system, which power profile are you using in Windows?


 @Jpmboy

Just in case you've missed my questions


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> @*Jpmboy*
> 
> Just in case you've missed my questions


there is no conflict for control with both enabled. If you have c 6 enable, I believe 'shift prevails. 
It is just a clean configuration of either with the other disabled and appropriate c-states... and, you know which is in play - right?


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> there is no conflict for control with both enabled. If you have c 6 enable, I believe 'shift prevails.
> It is just a clean configuration of either with the other disabled and appropriate c-states... and, you know which is in play - right?


Ok, I have to read more about these two features then.
@GeneO

What is your ambient temp to warrant a 38C 960 Evo M.2 temp1?


----------



## GeneO

kevindd992002 said:


> Ok, I have to read more about these two features then.
> 
> @*GeneO*
> 
> What is your ambient temp to warrant a 38C 960 Evo M.2 temp1?


Around 25-26c


----------



## Scotty99

Do you guys redo your stress testing after updating bios? Its been so long since ive tried 5.0 (been running 4.8 for a few months) i decided to give it another go. Wouldnt you know it my chip is "stable" (quotes because its only been half a day) .02v less than before. Using the exact same settings and testing programs not only am i not getting any errors but it passed 15mins of realbench which i know crashed at the same 1.375v i tried a few months ago.

Cant call it fully stable cause its only been a few hours but given the fact its the exact same settings/programs/hardware i kinda wanna say asus is improving overclocking with new bios releases, at least on the strix-f.


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> there is no conflict for control with both enabled. If you have c 6 enable, I believe 'shift prevails.
> It is just a clean configuration of either with the other disabled and appropriate c-states... and, you know which is in play - right?





GeneO said:


> Around 25-26c


Well, my ambient is 32C and that's around 7C of a difference. My temp1 idle temp is 48C and yours is 38C. I can see that being normal don't you think?


----------



## GeneO

kevindd992002 said:


> Well, my ambient is 32C and that's around 7C of a difference. My temp1 idle temp is 48C and yours is 38C. I can see that being normal don't you think?


Yes, I agree.


----------



## cyan

I did QFan tuning in the bios and it said 31% for my 3pin fans, 15% for my 4 pins fans.
I wonder why in the settings it still keep minimum 60% for 3 pin fans. 
PWM fans work fine and I can put min to 15%
Does ASUS purposely set min limit for DC Fan in bios? I prefer using bios instead of software if possible.

Mobo is Hero with 1101 bios.


----------



## fleps

cyan said:


> I did QFan tuning in the bios and it said 31% for my 3pin fans, 15% for my 4 pins fans.
> I wonder why in the settings it still keep minimum 60% for 3 pin fans.
> PWM fans work fine and I can put min to 15%
> Does ASUS purposely set min limit for DC Fan in bios? I prefer using bios instead of software if possible.
> 
> Mobo is Hero with 1101 bios.


I learned that t he bios control is very limited and I was able to only configure the way I wanted installing Asus AI Suite 3, which works fine and uses less than 2MB of ram while running on tray.


----------



## kevindd992002

Would you be able to install Fan Xpert alone though? The other features included in the ASUS AISuite 3 are all just bloat and I hate installing then on my system.

Also, will changes in the software be reflected in the BIOS also?


----------



## GeneO

kevindd992002 said:


> Would you be able to install Fan Xpert alone though? The other features included in the ASUS AISuite 3 are all just bloat and I hate installing then on my system.
> 
> Also, will changes in the software be reflected in the BIOS also?


You can install AISuite without any other options. That includes the dual intelligent processor and fanexpert. You cannot install fanexpert stand-alone. But it is worth it IMO, never had an issue, and you can do tweaking to your BIOS overclock in windows for quick turn-around on testing.


----------



## cyan

fleps said:


> I learned that t he bios control is very limited and I was able to only configure the way I wanted installing Asus AI Suite 3, which works fine and uses less than 2MB of ram while running on tray.


I still use speedfan for windows.
It's just I hate unnecessary noise for few seconds before the software load.


----------



## kevindd992002

GeneO said:


> You can install AISuite without any other options. That includes the dual intelligent processor and fanexpert. You cannot install fanexpert stand-alone. But it is worth it IMO, never had an issue, and you can do tweaking to your BIOS overclock in windows for quick turn-around on testing.


Well, when I was trying to install AISuite, there's only one option which the is the Dual Intelligent Processor. If I uncheck that box, you cannot click Next. So I had no choice but to check it to proceed and then after installation all of AISuite got installed. What gives?


----------



## kevindd992002

So I haven't installed any drivers in my system yet so I'm using all default Windows 10 drivers but when I ran Superposition benchmark, I'm hearing crackling sounds from my speakers connected to the rear I/O green port. It looks to be a very common issue among ASUS ROG Z370 board users as explained here: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?97220-Maximus-X-Audio-Popping . I've seen a few posts in this OCN thread too about it. Is there any news of a fix to this and how widespread is it? Would it be wise to RMA this board for that issue alone with a high probability that the next board I get has the same problem?

It's just downright disappointing buying a premium board that advertises premium audio quality and you get this very stupid problem! I have yet to try installing the Realtek audio drivers but I doubt that will fix the problem. My speakers are working perfectly on my old Sandy Bridge system, btw.


----------



## Delphiwizard

Delphiwizard said:


> Hi guys, i was planning a new system this year and already have some parts for the new build, case, gpu and rog base function panel ( https://www.asus.com/be-nl/Motherboard-Accessory/ROG_Front_Base/ ).
> 
> I am now looking at cpu's and motherboards, i am looking at the Intel 8700 cpu and comparing the Maximus X formula and Maximus X code, however i don't see a connection for the rog base function panel anymore on both models.
> Am i overlooking something or is there no more connectors for the panel?
> 
> Are there other socket 1151v2 motherboards that still have the rog panel connection?


Nobody who knows if Asus stopped putting the Rog base panel connector on their motherboards?
I was tempted to get a i7 8700 but i think i'll wait for the 8 core z390 chipset, depends on when that is released.


----------



## Jpmboy

Delphiwizard said:


> Nobody who knows if Asus stopped putting the Rog base panel connector on their motherboards?
> I was tempted to get a i7 8700 but i think i'll wait for the 8 core z390 chipset, depends on when that is released.


you mean the OC Panel? if yes, the Apex has the rog connector.


----------



## Delphiwizard

Thanks Jmpboy!

Your right, the Maximus X Apex has the ROG_EXT connector.
I'm happy now, i figured the extra rog base panel i bought was going to a wasted purchase, now it seems i will be able to use it.
Maybe i'll have to go for Z370/I7 8700 anyway.

I'll check manuals of other models if they have the rog_ext connector too, i checked a few weeks ago but didn't see it then.


----------



## Delphiwizard

Can i ask which memory modules/speed would be best with the Asus Maximus X Apex/I7 8700k cpu?
I'm looking at Kingston HyperX Fury 2 x 16 gb, 2666 mhz, 2400 mhz or other speed?


----------



## Menthol

Delphiwizard said:


> Can i ask which memory modules/speed would be best with the Asus Maximus X Apex/I7 8700k cpu?
> I'm looking at Kingston HyperX Fury 2 x 16 gb, 2666 mhz, 2400 mhz or other speed?


Any Gskill 2x8GB B-die kit (will save you headaches)

3200Mhz 14-14-14
3600Mhz 16-16-16 - 15-15-15 even better
4133Mhz 19-19-19
I am using the 16GB 2X8 4226 Mhz 19-19-19 kit myself on an Apex


----------



## Delphiwizard

I just checked the QVL memory compatibility list, the Fury isn't on there i see.
430C15PB3K2/32 is, HyperX Predator.

I never had Gskill, i'll take a look at it, anyway, since the Apex only had 2 ram slots i need 2 modules of 16.
F4-3000C15D-32GTZ G.Skill Trident Z CL15 3000 mhz, would this be a good choice?


----------



## Praz

kevindd992002 said:


> So I haven't installed any drivers in my system yet so I'm using all default Windows 10 drivers but when I ran Superposition benchmark, I'm hearing crackling sounds from my speakers connected to the rear I/O green port. It looks to be a very common issue among ASUS ROG Z370 board users as explained here: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?97220-Maximus-X-Audio-Popping . I've seen a few posts in this OCN thread too about it. Is there any news of a fix to this and how widespread is it? Would it be wise to RMA this board for that issue alone with a high probability that the next board I get has the same problem?
> 
> It's just downright disappointing buying a premium board that advertises premium audio quality and you get this very stupid problem! I have yet to try installing the Realtek audio drivers but I doubt that will fix the problem. My speakers are working perfectly on my old Sandy Bridge system, btw.


Hello

Realtek's reply regarding this is in the ROG thread you linked to. Did you miss it?


----------



## cyan

Menthol said:


> Any Gskill 2x8GB B-die kit (will save you headaches)
> 
> 3200Mhz 14-14-14
> 3600Mhz 16-16-16 - 15-15-15 even better
> 4133Mhz 19-19-19
> I am using the 16GB 2X8 4226 Mhz 19-19-19 kit myself on an Apex


Is all 2x8GB Gskill 3200Mhz 14-14-14 B-die ?
how to check if mine is B-die ?


----------



## kevindd992002

Praz said:


> kevindd992002 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I haven't installed any drivers in my system yet so I'm using all default Windows 10 drivers but when I ran Superposition benchmark, I'm hearing crackling sounds from my speakers connected to the rear I/O green port. It looks to be a very common issue among ASUS ROG Z370 board users as explained here: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?97220-Maximus-X-Audio-Popping . I've seen a few posts in this OCN thread too about it. Is there any news of a fix to this and how widespread is it? Would it be wise to RMA this board for that issue alone with a high probability that the next board I get has the same problem?
> 
> It's just downright disappointing buying a premium board that advertises premium audio quality and you get this very stupid problem! I have yet to try installing the Realtek audio drivers but I doubt that will fix the problem. My speakers are working perfectly on my old Sandy Bridge system, btw.
> 
> 
> 
> Hello
> 
> Realtek's reply regarding this is in the ROG thread you linked to. Did you miss it?
Click to expand...

I haven't read the whole thread yet but I'll look for it. Thanks for the tip.


----------



## gammagoat

cyan said:


> Is all 2x8GB Gskill 3200Mhz 14-14-14 B-die ?
> how to check if mine is B-die ?


thaiphoon burner.

http://www.softnology.biz/files.html


----------



## zGunBLADEz

https://youtu.be/cA2NQsgrJPk

Just saw this video and everything makes sense now...

Wth is this crap wheres raja to explain this crap...

No wonder i been having so many issues with this mobo.


----------



## GeneO

kevindd992002 said:


> I haven't read the whole thread yet but I'll look for it. Thanks for the tip.


Shorter and to the bottom line:

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...o-Crackling-Popping-from-back-and-front-ports


----------



## Scotty99

Man i get so unlucky with motherboard choice, i also have the same crackling and audio sync issues.

Nvm i assume he means disable and reenable device not drivers. Ill test to see if it fixes it, but what is the real fix if realtek says the problem is between nvidia and windows 10?


----------



## kevindd992002

GeneO said:


> You can install AISuite without any other options. That includes the dual intelligent processor and fanexpert. You cannot install fanexpert stand-alone. But it is worth it IMO, never had an issue, and you can do tweaking to your BIOS overclock in windows for quick turn-around on testing.





GeneO said:


> Shorter and to the bottom line:
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...o-Crackling-Popping-from-back-and-front-ports


Thanks!


----------



## cyan

gammagoat said:


> thaiphoon burner.
> 
> http://www.softnology.biz/files.html


thanks.. b-die confirmed


----------



## encrypted11

Scotty99 said:


> Man i get so unlucky with motherboard choice, i also have the same crackling and audio sync issues.
> 
> Nvm i assume he means disable and reenable device not drivers. Ill test to see if it fixes it, but what is the real fix if realtek says the problem is between nvidia and windows 10?



Well, I've found the following Realtek v8400+ packages from Dell and ASRock. Obviously it isn't an Asus customised version, so you'll have to forget about working it on Sonic Studio III if you got your system to accept those vcia device manager. They work on common Realtek Audio codecs like the ALC1220 and the ASUS rebrands like S1220/S1220A. The Dell changelog explicitly lists "Fixed intermittent sound lost issue of audio streaming", its probably up to ASUS to integrate and publish their Sonic Studio ready versions at this point.

https://www.dell.com/support/home/us/en/19/Drivers/DriversDetails?driverId=88PPP
ftp://asrock.cn/Drivers/All/Audio/Audio(v8408_FF00).zip


----------



## Jpmboy

Delphiwizard said:


> I just checked the QVL memory compatibility list, the Fury isn't on there i see.
> 430C15PB3K2/32 is, HyperX Predator.
> 
> I never had Gskill, i'll take a look at it, anyway, since the Apex only had 2 ram slots i need 2 modules of 16.
> F4-3000C15D-32GTZ G.Skill Trident Z CL15 3000 mhz, would this be a good choice?


if you need 32GB (2x16GB sticks) and are not planning to overclock the ram, any of the 3000 or 3200 kits on the QVL will be fine. With ram prices the way they are, check the OCN market place too! :thumb:


----------



## tiefox

Im on the same situation, want 32gb on the apex, but want the fastest as possible ram. Looking into this one from the QVL

https://www.amazon.com/Corsair-CMK32GX4M2F4000C19-Vengeance-2x16GB-Desktop/dp/B074MQZ644


----------



## Jpmboy

tiefox said:


> Im on the same situation, want 32gb on the apex, but want the fastest as possible ram. Looking into this one from the QVL
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Corsair-CMK32GX4M2F4000C19-Vengeance-2x16GB-Desktop/dp/B074MQZ644


once you get past 3600 or so I would not rely on XMP, the cpu IMC really is the key. They are certainly worth a try and Amazon is really good with returns if there is an issue. I'd be pretty confident of getting 3600-3866 with tight timings with that kit.
Can you find these G. Skill: F4-3866C18D-32GTZ ?


----------



## tiefox

Jpmboy said:


> once you get past 3600 or so I would not rely on XMP, the cpu IMC really is the key. They are certainly worth a try and Amazon is really good with returns if there is an issue. I'd be pretty confident of getting 3600-3866 with tight timings with that kit.
> Can you find these G. Skill: F4-3866C18D-32GTZ ?


Right now im running a 16gb 4266 c19 kit @ 3733 c15, wont boot past that, but I guess getting at least this same speed with 32gb would be a long shot... 

Im inthe EU so this 3866 kit does not seem to be available anywhere, I can get 3200 c14 , maybe should try that and see how much it will clock..


----------



## Jpmboy

tiefox said:


> Right now im running a 16gb 4266 c19 kit @ 3733 c15, wont boot past that, but I guess getting at least this same speed with 32gb would be a long shot...
> 
> Im inthe EU so this 3866 kit does not seem to be available anywhere, I can get 3200 c14 , maybe should try that and see how much it will clock..


cool. just remember, 16GB DS sticks are more (much more) of a challenge to overclock vs 8GB SS sticks.


----------



## kevindd992002

Are you able to install a small fan in the ASUS Maximus X code that will blow air into the top M.2 SSD slot?


----------



## CRJ84

New bios for Hero x

https://www.asus.com/dk/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO/HelpDesk_BIOS/

1301
ROG MAXIMUS X HERO BIOS 1301
Support RAID on CPU function in Z370 series.
Improved DRAM compatibility

Any one tried it yet?


----------



## GAN77

ROG MAXIMUS X FORMULA BIOS 1301
Support RAID on CPU function in Z370 series.
Improved DRAM compatibility

Who knows? What changes does the bios have other than those on the site?


----------



## scracy

GAN77 said:


> ROG MAXIMUS X FORMULA BIOS 1301
> Support RAID on CPU function in Z370 series.
> Improved DRAM compatibility
> 
> Who knows? What changes does the bios have other than those on the site?


Good question I would like to know myself,I'm hoping they finally monitor VRM temperatures in the UEFI, anyone tried the new Formula UEFI yet?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

1301 is out for the Apex too, same short fix list:

Support RAID on CPU function in Z370 series.
Improved DRAM compatibility


----------



## encrypted11

VROC?









About time to ditch DMI 3.0 that's barely keeping up with good NVMe SSDs for VROC?


----------



## kevindd992002

scracy said:


> GAN77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS X FORMULA BIOS 1301
> Support RAID on CPU function in Z370 series.
> Improved DRAM compatibility
> 
> Who knows? What changes does the bios have other than those on the site?
> 
> 
> 
> Good question I would like to know myself,I'm hoping they finally monitor VRM temperatures in the UEFI, anyone tried the new Formula UEFI yet?
Click to expand...

What is the advantage of VRM monitoring in UEFI over VRM monitoring in HWInfo?


----------



## WiSH2oo0

CRJ84 said:


> ROG MAXIMUS X HERO BIOS 1301
> Support RAID on CPU function in Z370 series.
> Improved DRAM compatibility?


No I just got my OC stable this week with 1101.


----------



## scracy

kevindd992002 said:


> What is the advantage of VRM monitoring in UEFI over VRM monitoring in HWInfo?


If VRM temperature appears in the monitor tab of the UEFI then AIDA64 will be able to display VRM temperature in Windows, I use AIDA64 sidebar gadget to monitor everything


----------



## GeneO

kevindd992002 said:


> What is the advantage of VRM monitoring in UEFI over VRM monitoring in HWInfo?


I imagine you would be able to have fanxpert use it as a source for fan speed control.


----------



## GAN77

Asus made the final bios beta http://www.overclock.net/forum/26714769-post1352.html????
I did not notice the difference, it's true.
Where repair adapitv?
Asrock for a long time all has made, asus "cuts " bios since winter. 4 months have passed. It's the top(((


----------



## WiSH2oo0

Well my OC is no longer Prime95 stable on Bios 1301!

Buyer beware!

So what I'm seeing looking at the voltages in HWiNFO from bios 1101 VTT was at 1.376 with the new bios 1301 my VTT is reading 1.016. What is VTT and could that voltage change mess up my once stable OC from bios 1101?


----------



## Jpmboy

WiSH2oo0 said:


> Well my OC is no longer Prime95 stable on Bios 1301!
> 
> Buyer beware!
> 
> So what I'm seeing looking at the voltages in HWiNFO from bios 1101 VTT was at 1.376 with the new bios 1301 my VTT is reading 1.016. W*hat is VTT and could that voltage change mess up my once stable OC from bios 1101*?


VTT was 1.376V Really?? I'll have to load HWi. (I use SIV64 if not AID64)

Anyway - do not expect settings to always port from one bios release to another. New bios... New overclock. If they do port over, consider that the anomaly.


----------



## kevindd992002

scracy said:


> If VRM temperature appears in the monitor tab of the UEFI then AIDA64 will be able to display VRM temperature in Windows, I use AIDA64 sidebar gadget to monitor everything


I don't use AIDA64 but why can't it detect VRM temps like HWInfo can? Is there advantages to AIDA64 over HWInfo?


----------



## ViTosS

Maybe they fixed adaptive mode in this new BIOS?


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> I don't use AIDA64 but why can't it detect VRM temps like HWInfo can? Is there advantages to AIDA64 over HWInfo?


sure AID64 reads vrm temps (as does SIV64). AID64 has may OSD advantages 



ViTosS said:


> Maybe they fixed adaptive mode in this new BIOS?


I hope there's no changes for the apex... it works perfectly there.


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> sure AID64 reads vrm temps (as does SIV64). AID64 has may OSD advantages
> 
> 
> 
> I hope there's no changes for the apex... it works perfectly there.


I see. Do you know which AIDA64 VRM temp monitoring issue is @scracy referring to?


----------



## scracy

kevindd992002 said:


> I see. Do you know which AIDA64 VRM temp monitoring issue is @scracy referring to?


AIDA64 wont read VRM temperature unless it appears in the monitor tab for the UEFI see this link https://forums.aida64.com/topic/4031-asus-maximus-x-hero-missing-vrm-temp/


----------



## TheLastHero

I just got a ROG STRIX Z370-F GAMING motherboard today, and the led's above the I/O aren't working at all. I'm on the latest bios, and have tried shutting the RGB settings on/off in the bios with no luck. Any ideas? I a google search came up with the odd person who had a loose cable for those lights, that connects to the motherboard. I'm not about to pull the motherboard out to check though. Also, in the ASUS AURA software there is no "motherboard" option. It will control my Corsair vengeance DDR4 just fine though....


----------



## Scotty99

Dbl post


----------



## Scotty99

TheLastHero said:


> I just got a ROG STRIX Z370-F GAMING motherboard today, and the led's above the I/O aren't working at all. I'm on the latest bios, and have tried shutting the RGB settings on/off in the bios with no luck. Any ideas? I a google search came up with the odd person who had a loose cable for those lights, that connects to the motherboard. I'm not about to pull the motherboard out to check though. Also, in the ASUS AURA software there is no "motherboard" option. It will control my Corsair vengeance DDR4 just fine though....


Reinstall aura using "setup" instead of "asus setup".


----------



## TheLastHero

Scotty99 said:


> Reinstall aura using "setup" instead of "asus setup".


I didn't wanna do it, but I ended up pulling the mobo out. Took the I/O shroud off. Sure enough the cable for the LED's was barely connected. Re-connected it and it's working!


----------



## Scotty99

TheLastHero said:


> I didn't wanna do it, but I ended up pulling the mobo out. Took the I/O shroud off. Sure enough the cable for the LED's was barely connected. Re-connected it and it's working!


Crazy because the exact issue you described was fixed by reinstalling the way i did, either way glad you got it fixed


----------



## kevindd992002

scracy said:


> AIDA64 wont read VRM temperature unless it appears in the monitor tab for the UEFI see this link https://forums.aida64.com/topic/4031-asus-maximus-x-hero-missing-vrm-temp/


I see, I see. And if I remember correctly, some are not affected by this issue, right?


----------



## scracy

kevindd992002 said:


> I see, I see. And if I remember correctly, some are not affected by this issue, right?


Some Hero boards have VRM sensors and some apparently do not, my Formula board definitely has the VRM sensors as I can monitor them via HwInfo, AIDA64 claim that monitoring VRM temperatures in the same way that HWInfo does can cause overclock instability which is inline with what the warning box for Hwinfo says, apparently AIDA64 have been trying to convince Asus to change the way they allow for hardware monitoring for several years now to no avail sadly.


----------



## feznz

WiSH2oo0 said:


> Well my OC is no longer Prime95 stable on Bios 1301!
> 
> Buyer beware!
> 
> So what I'm seeing looking at the voltages in HWiNFO from bios 1101 VTT was at 1.376 with the new bios 1301 my VTT is reading 1.016. What is VTT and could that voltage change mess up my once stable OC from bios 1101?




Same here took a slight core voltage bump with 1301 - 1.430v vs 1101 - 1.424v


----------



## TheLastHero

Can you guys help me overclock my 8700k, I'm using the Z370-F mobo with latest bios, Corsair vengeance LED 2666 DDR4 (2x8GB), and Corsair H100i V2. Been reading on various places, and seen on YouTube that changing the multiplier to 47 on all cores without changing anything else SHOULD work...I tried it and while running IBT the cpu broke 90C so I had to stop it immediately. What's the best way of doing this? I'd be more than happy with 4.7, if I could get it.


----------



## Scotty99

TheLastHero said:


> Can you guys help me overclock my 8700k, I'm using the Z370-F mobo with latest bios, Corsair vengeance LED 2666 DDR4 (2x8GB), and Corsair H100i V2. Been reading on various places, and seen on YouTube that changing the multiplier to 47 on all cores without changing anything else SHOULD work...I tried it and while running IBT the cpu broke 90C so I had to stop it immediately. What's the best way of doing this? I'd be more than happy with 4.7, if I could get it.


I have that board, do this:

Set xmp
Sync all cores
Multi to 47
Disable multicore enhancement
Disable cpu svid support
Set load line calibration to 6 (under digi+ power control)
Select manual CPU voltage, set to 1.25v (will be about 1.235 under load)

For those voltages you shouldnt need to increase power limits, but check the clockspeeds during IBT to see if they fluctuate.


----------



## TheLastHero

Scotty99 said:


> I have that board, do this:
> 
> Set xmp
> Sync all cores
> Multi to 47
> Disable multicore enhancement
> Disable cpu svid support
> Set load line calibration to 6 (under digi+ power control)
> Select manual CPU voltage, set to 1.25v (will be about 1.235 under load)
> 
> For those voltages you shouldnt need to increase power limits, but check the clockspeeds during IBT to see if they fluctuate.


Thanks for this! I just ran IBT with those settings, while using HWinFO64 to monitor temps/voltages. It passed 10 runs on the "very high" setting, here are some stats:

Max vCore - 1.248v
Max CPU package temp - 87c, there was a lot of fluctuation here. It stayed up in the high 70's most of the time. When hitting 80+, it didn't stay there long at all maybe a few seconds or so.
Core clock - Stayed at 4.7, and occasionally dropped just under, lowest being 4.695.

If there any tweaks I can do to those settings to drop the max temp down? Maybe I'll try dropping the core voltage ever slow slightly, and keep re-testing it each time.


----------



## SpeedyIV

*No VRM Temp Sensor Reporting on Maximus X Hero WIFI*



scracy said:


> Some Hero boards have VRM sensors and some apparently do not, my Formula board definitely has the VRM sensors as I can monitor them via HwInfo, AIDA64 claim that monitoring VRM temperatures in the same way that HWInfo does can cause overclock instability which is inline with what the warning box for Hwinfo says, apparently AIDA64 have been trying to convince Asus to change the way they allow for hardware monitoring for several years now to no avail sadly.


Yeah my Maximus X Hero WIFI does NOT have VRM sensor reporting, at least with BIOS 0802 and 1003. I just loaded 1101 but have not checked if VRM temp reporting "came back" and now there is BIOS 1304, so I may load that and see if VRM temp appears. Some have claimed that their HERO boards do (or did) report VRM temp. I was told by the authors of HWiNFO and AIDA64 that Asus changed a component, resulting in the loss of VRM temp reporting, and then just quietly removed it from the BIOS. I actually googled HERO reviews and found 6 reviews with full BIOS screen dumps. None of them showed VRM temps (and none of the reviewers noticed it missing). The reviewers had early release boards, so that fact that it was missing from all of their screen shots leads to be believe that it was never there. The people who claimed there Hero board reported VRM temp never posted a BIOS screen shot, so maybe, maybe not.

Despite numerous requests, the Asus rep who frequents this forum would not comment or respond to any posts about this issue. There was a thread on the ROG forum about it too. The Asus webs site for the board still indicates that the HERO WIFI has a VRM temp sensor. The consenus was that it was a crappy thing for Asus to do, but perhaps not too much of a concern since VRM temps are not a large concern on Z370. I ended up sticking a temp sensor under the VRM heat sink, though I really don't have any way to gauge it's accuracy. YMMV...


----------



## Jpmboy

TheLastHero said:


> Can you guys help me overclock my 8700k, I'm using the Z370-F mobo with latest bios, Corsair vengeance LED 2666 DDR4 (2x8GB), and Corsair H100i V2. Been reading on various places, and seen on YouTube that changing the multiplier to 47 on all cores without changing anything else SHOULD work...I tried it and while running IBT the cpu broke 90C so I had to stop it immediately. What's the best way of doing this? I'd be more than happy with 4.7, if I could get it.


you should have a read of the two guides in the OP of this thread.


----------



## Scotty99

TheLastHero said:


> Thanks for this! I just ran IBT with those settings, while using HWinFO64 to monitor temps/voltages. It passed 10 runs on the "very high" setting, here are some stats:
> 
> Max vCore - 1.248v
> Max CPU package temp - 87c, there was a lot of fluctuation here. It stayed up in the high 70's most of the time. When hitting 80+, it didn't stay there long at all maybe a few seconds or so.
> Core clock - Stayed at 4.7, and occasionally dropped just under, lowest being 4.695.
> 
> If there any tweaks I can do to those settings to drop the max temp down? Maybe I'll try dropping the core voltage ever slow slightly, and keep re-testing it each time.


As far as i know thats really all you need to tweak on these boards, you can try and shoot for lower but i figured 1.25 was a good starting point. I never tried 4.7 but for 4.8 i needed 1.275.


----------



## kevindd992002

Can anyone confirm if the T_Sensor temp sensor channel is a non-EC probe that is natively supported by either HWInfo or AIDA64 without turning on EC support?


----------



## scracy

kevindd992002 said:


> Can anyone confirm if the T_Sensor temp sensor channel is a non-EC probe that is natively supported by either HWInfo or AIDA64 without turning on EC support?


T_Sensor probe works with AIDA64, Im using it for water temperature


----------



## GeneO

Yes it is EFI, not EC. You can use it as a temperature source for fan control.


----------



## kevindd992002

I thought so, great  So VRM, WATER_IN and WATER_OUT are all EC.


----------



## scracy

kevindd992002 said:


> I thought so, great  So VRM, WATER_IN and WATER_OUT are all EC.


In the past yes that was the case and most likely for this generation as well, water in and out temp is pretty pointless anyway since water temperature tends to equalise throughout the loop


----------



## kevindd992002

scracy said:


> In the past yes that was the case and most likely for this generation as well, water in and out temp is pretty pointless anyway since water temperature tends to equalise throughout the loop


Right. But it's still good to have a temp sensor that can measure ambient temp. So extra temp headers in the board won't hurt so that you can measure water delta T.


----------



## cyan

SpeedyIV said:


> Yeah my Maximus X Hero WIFI does NOT have VRM sensor reporting, at least with BIOS 0802 and 1003. I just loaded 1101 but have not checked if VRM temp reporting "came back" and now there is BIOS 1304, so I may load that and see if VRM temp appears. Some have claimed that their HERO boards do (or did) report VRM temp. I was told by the authors of HWiNFO and AIDA64 that Asus changed a component, resulting in the loss of VRM temp reporting, and then just quietly removed it from the BIOS. I actually googled HERO reviews and found 6 reviews with full BIOS screen dumps. None of them showed VRM temps (and none of the reviewers noticed it missing). The reviewers had early release boards, so that fact that it was missing from all of their screen shots leads to be believe that it was never there. The people who claimed there Hero board reported VRM temp never posted a BIOS screen shot, so maybe, maybe not.
> 
> Despite numerous requests, the Asus rep who frequents this forum would not comment or respond to any posts about this issue. There was a thread on the ROG forum about it too. The Asus webs site for the board still indicates that the HERO WIFI has a VRM temp sensor. The consenus was that it was a crappy thing for Asus to do, but perhaps not too much of a concern since VRM temps are not a large concern on Z370. I ended up sticking a temp sensor under the VRM heat sink, though I really don't have any way to gauge it's accuracy. YMMV...


I manage to find one that posted picture.
http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php/788929-ASUS-Maximus-X-VRM-temps
Sadly my Hero X non Wifi also doesn't have VRM temp .


----------



## WiSH2oo0

Is the Ring/LLC Clock on this motherboard maxed out at 4.7GHz? When I enter 48 or 49 into the bios & hit save, HWiNFO is still only showing 4.7GHz Ring/LLC Clock.


----------



## Jpmboy

WiSH2oo0 said:


> Is the Ring/LLC Clock on this motherboard maxed out at 4.7GHz? When I enter 48 or 49 into the bios & hit save, HWiNFO is still only showing 4.7GHz Ring/LLC Clock.


disable ring bin down in bios. :thumb:


----------



## WiSH2oo0

Thank You


----------



## bl4ckdot

Should I settle for now at 3200c14 (HCI 200%)? 4x8Gb is a hard to o/c and I'm having trouble at 3600.


Motherboard: ASUS ROG MAXIMUS X FORMULA 

RAM: G.Skill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK


Edit : wrong topic, sorry


----------



## SpeedyIV

cyan said:


> I manage to find one that posted picture.
> http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php/788929-ASUS-Maximus-X-VRM-temps
> Sadly my Hero X non Wifi also doesn't have VRM temp .


Yes there it is! This is the first time I have actually seen a screen shot of anything (in this case HWINFO) showing a VRM temp from a Maximus X HERO board. So it IS (or was) there on some boards. Most of the reviews I found were done before or just after release of these boards, so early BIOS. The post you found is from February of 2018 so pretty recent. The OP does not mention what BIOS he had loaded. I would like to know when he purchased his HERO board, and where, and what BIOS he was using. Anyway, it proves the point. VRM temp monitoring WAS present on SOME Hero boards, but seems to not be on most. I still think the AIDA and HWINFO authors are right and Asus changed a component at some point, then tried to hide the fact that the change resulted in no more VRM temp monitoring. They still won't comment.

Thanks for posting that.


----------



## TheLastHero

Just to let you guys know, there's a new bios version as of today for the Z370-F (April 20, 2018).

Version 0615 

https://www.asus.com/ca-en/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING/HelpDesk_Download/


----------



## Scotty99

What the fluff, its only been 11 days since they released 0614 lol.


----------



## feznz

Scotty99 said:


> What the fluff, its only been 11 days since they released 0614 lol.


Its normal for Asus probably be another 5 Bios updates by the end of the year


----------



## jugs

I've been looking to switch to adaptive mode from manual voltage. With manual 1.375v Vcore & LLC5, I get a normal droop to 1.328v under all core load. When I switch to adaptive 1.375v LL5 (best-case scenario and 0.01/0.01), then I see a VID of 1.414v and a Vcore of no less than 1.360-1.376 under all core load. 

How can I get my adaptive vcore to behave the same as manual does under load?


----------



## Jpmboy

jugs said:


> I've been looking to switch to adaptive mode from manual voltage. With manual 1.375v Vcore & LLC5, I get a normal droop to 1.328v under all core load. When I switch to adaptive 1.375v LL5 (best-case scenario and 0.01/0.01), then I see a VID of 1.414v and a Vcore of no less than 1.360-1.376 under all core load.
> 
> How can I get my adaptive vcore to behave the same as manual does under load?


did you try LLC 4? (more droop?)


----------



## jugs

Jpmboy said:


> did you try LLC 4? (more droop?)


I figured it would be a more drastic setting, isn't the VID too high at 1.414v? Because LLC5 manual is ideal, but adaptive tries to get way more voltage somehow?


----------



## WiSH2oo0

jugs said:


> (best-case scenario and 0.01/0.01)


From what I've read you either want to use SVID Behaviour - Best-Case Scenario or IA AC/DC Load Lines - 0.01 but not both. I used the IA AC/DC Load Lines - 0.01 for my OC. I think they were using both on older bios versions and now they've fixed that in the new releases.


----------



## jugs

WiSH2oo0 said:


> From what I've read you either want to use SVID Behaviour - Best-Case Scenario or IA AC/DC Load Lines - 0.01 but not both. I used the IA AC/DC Load Lines - 0.01 for my OC. I think they were using both on older bios versions and now they've fixed that in the new releases.


Yeah I saw that before as well from Raja in this thread, but when I tried it the voltages were significantly different (best case scenario only vs both). Not sure the BIOS for my board was changed, or maybe not the current version?


----------



## Jpmboy

this depends on using the most recent 2 bioses... and I'm not aware of any conflict if both are set: best case and load lines.


----------



## Jpmboy

jugs said:


> I figured it would be a more drastic setting, isn't the VID too high at 1.414v? Because LLC5 manual is ideal, but adaptive tries to get way more voltage somehow?


lower LLC settings (numbers) is less load line compensation... so more vdroop. Higher LLC settings (numbers in bios) give less droop, with LLC 7 and higher raising vcore at load in my case (which is not what you want).

Asrock reverses the LLC number=droop thing compared with ASUS.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> lower LLC settings (numbers) is less load line compensation... so more vdroop. Higher LLC settings (numbers in bios) give less droop, with LLC 7 and higher raising vcore at load in my case (which is not what you want).
> 
> Asrock reverses the LLC number=droop thing compared with ASUS.


LLC 7 is the one that raises for you, LLC 6 does that for me, I'd hate to try LLC 7 with the increase I see using LLC 6 

I might try for 5Ghz again using LLC 5 and 1.4v in BIOS, gotta pass the OCCT Small Data Set though.


----------



## GeneO

schoolofmonkey said:


> LLC 7 is the one that raises for you, LLC 6 does that for me, I'd hate to try LLC 7 with the increase I see using LLC 6
> 
> I might try for 5Ghz again using LLC 5 and 1.4v in BIOS, gotta pass the OCCT Small Data Set though.


For me too I do not like LLC 6 with negative droop nor LLC 5 with a large idle voltage and lots of droop. I have struggled with both to get a stable overclock (1.4v vcore didn't do it for LLC 6), so I tried to get a load line somewhere between L5 and L6. I have succeeded I think and am pretty far into a Realbench verification. 

Here is what I did:
AVX offset 1
All cores 50x
Ring 46x
LLC 5
Multicore enabled
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.38
IA AC Load Line 0.2
IA DC Load Line 0.2

These last two increase the slope of the load line so the voltage is almost flat. Under Realbench I get 1.376v vcore which is slightly less than the turbo core voltage of 1.38v. This is a load line somewhere between LLC5 and LLC6 and seems to work well for me. 

I was trying to get the OC stable using the standard load lines with up to 1.4v Vcore and was not succeeding. Now I think I have a stable 5 GHz at 1.376v Vcore.

EDIT: I should add that I am verifying it with Realbench 2.43, which doesn't have much AVX and runs at the full 5 GHz most of the time. The core voltage is above the 4.9 GHz core voltage for a OCCPT small dataset stability so it should be AVX stable with the negative offset of 1.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

GeneO said:


> For me too I do not like LLC 6 with negative droop nor LLC 5 with a large idle voltage and lots of droop. I have struggled with both to get a stable overclock (1.4v vcore didn't do it for LLC 6), so I tried to get a load line somewhere between L5 and L6. I have succeeded I think and am pretty far into a Realbench verification.
> 
> Here is what I did:
> AVX offset 1
> All cores 50x
> Ring 46x
> LLC 5
> Multicore enabled
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.38
> IA AC Load Line 0.2
> IA DC Load Line 0.2
> 
> These last two increase the slope of the load line so the voltage is almost flat. Under Realbench I get 1.376v vcore which is slightly less than the turbo core voltage of 1.38v. This is a load line somewhere between LLC5 and LLC6 and seems to work well for me.
> 
> Edit:
> Those settings do nothing for my vdroop levels, though I probably should of said I'm using manual voltages..
> 
> I was trying to get the OC stable using the standard load lines with up to 1.4v Vcore and was not succeeding. Now I think I have a stable 5 GHz at 1.376v Vcore.
> 
> EDIT: I should add that I am verifying it with Realbench 2.43, which doesn't have much AVX and runs at the full 5 GHz most of the time. The core voltage is above the 4.9 GHz core voltage for a OCCPT small dataset stability so it should be AVX stable with the negative offset of 1.


For me I have [email protected] LLC 5, which under load drops to 1.328v, this is completely stable for OCCT Small Data Set, now I only run it for an hour because anything over that is unrealistic.
I might try your IA settings and see how I go.


----------



## GeneO

schoolofmonkey said:


> For me I have [email protected] LLC 5, which under load drops to 1.328v, this is completely stable for OCCT Small Data Set, now I only run it for an hour because anything over that is unrealistic.
> I might try your IA settings and see how I go.


You have a better one than me FWIW . I need 1.36v LLC6 under load for a stable 4.9 GHz under OCCT SDS.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

GeneO said:


> You have a better one than me FWIW . I need 1.36v LLC6 under load for a stable 4.9 GHz under OCCT SDS.


Those settings didn't change my vdroop, probably because I'm using manual voltages... 

For 5Ghz I need 1.42v LLC5 to be 30 minute OCCT SDS stable.
I know people see it as overkill, but I know with that along with the other stress tests I'm at least 99% stable.


On a completely offtopic subject, @Jpmboy I've been having fun overclocking this Pentium 3, don't you miss the old dip switch days.


----------



## ih2try

Have you guys experienced crackling/popping sound with your asus z370 mobos ? It's a popular topic on the asus forums, however, there is no complete solution for it yet. Turning off windows' fast boot and bios' depop feature doesn't seem to completely solve it. I wonder if it's a problem with asus only or it happens with other brands that use Realtek's sound, too and how to fix it.


----------



## Scotty99

ih2try said:


> Have you guys experienced crackling/popping sound with your asus z370 mobos ? It's a popular topic on the asus forums, however, there is no complete solution for it yet. Turning off windows' fast boot and bios' depop feature doesn't seem to completely solve it. I wonder if it's a problem with asus only or it happens with other brands that use Realtek's sound, too and how to fix it.


Yup its pretty lame. I will say tho ever since disabling fast boot and disabling/re-enabling my 1060 from device manager i dont believe ive heard crackling since.

As an aside how hot do yall's chips get when gaming? I cant believe how good this kraken x62 is, even in a game that uses the CPU it sits in the mid 40's with a 5.0ghz overclock with nearly 1.4v. I must have a really good mount or something, ive seen people with 420 rads saying mid 60's during gaming, they must not have a delid tho.

When i first got this x62 i was disappointed because i was only looking at max temps, turns out that ONLY happens when i first launch a game. During actual gameplay the numbers are phenomenal.


----------



## GeneO

schoolofmonkey said:


> Those settings didn't change my vdroop, probably because I'm using manual voltages...
> 
> For 5Ghz I need 1.42v LLC5 to be 30 minute OCCT SDS stable.
> I know people see it as overkill, but I know with that along with the other stress tests I'm at least 99% stable.
> 
> 
> On a completely offtopic subject, @*Jpmboy* I've been having fun overclocking this Pentium 3, don't you miss the old dip switch days.


LOL. I do wonder if there is any difference between the flattened adaptive curve I got and manual.


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> LLC 7 is the one that raises for you, LLC 6 does that for me, I'd hate to try LLC 7 with the increase I see using LLC 6
> 
> I might try for 5Ghz again using LLC 5 and 1.4v in BIOS, *gotta pass the OCCT Small Data Set though*.


I have not used anything but LLC5. The OCCT thing... we're working on a cure for that affliction. 




schoolofmonkey said:


> Those settings didn't change my vdroop, probably because I'm using manual voltages...
> 
> For 5Ghz I need 1.42v LLC5 to be 30 minute OCCT SDS stable.
> I know people see it as overkill, but I know with that along with the other stress tests I'm at least 99% stable.
> 
> 
> On a completely offtopic subject, @*Jpmboy* I've been having fun overclocking this Pentium 3, don't you miss the old dip switch days.


now that's a 420 flashback moment


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> I have not used anything but LLC5. The OCCT thing... we're working on a cure for that affliction.


I just got to stop playing games that like AVX I guess, Oh and stop reading the forums seeing others use it 
I remember I didn't dare use OCCT SDS with x99 or x299 

I got the 550Mhz P3 to 700Mhz, that's all the VIA board supports, need a decent AGP 2x card now, might have a Matrox G450 or Geforce 3 Ti soon


----------



## TheLastHero

Scotty99 said:


> Yup its pretty lame. I will say tho ever since disabling fast boot and disabling/re-enabling my 1060 from device manager i dont believe ive heard crackling since.
> 
> As an aside how hot do yall's chips get when gaming? I cant believe how good this kraken x62 is, even in a game that uses the CPU it sits in the mid 40's with a 5.0ghz overclock with nearly 1.4v. I must have a really good mount or something, ive seen people with 420 rads saying mid 60's during gaming, they must not have a delid tho.
> 
> When i first got this x62 i was disappointed because i was only looking at max temps, turns out that ONLY happens when i first launch a game. During actual gameplay the numbers are phenomenal.


During game play I'm usually around 50 or so, it really depends. Can spike up close to 70 during heavy loading screens (Corsair H100i V2). That's at 1.215v 4.7ghz, based off of the bios settings you gave me. I've tried pushing 4.8, but temps during IBT testing breaks 90C...to be on the safe side I've always stopped the test when that's happened. Wouldn't mind a delid, but I don't think that's something I want to attempt myself. Gonna try and see if I can find someone locally, who might be able to.

Regarding the crackling, I haven't had any issues yet. Only had the mobo for a few days though.


----------



## Scotty99

TheLastHero said:


> During game play I'm usually around 50 or so, it really depends. Can spike up close to 70 during heavy loading screens (Corsair H100i V2). That's at 1.215v 4.7ghz, based off of the bios settings you gave me. I've tried pushing 4.8, but temps during IBT testing breaks 90C...to be on the safe side I've always stopped the test when that's happened. Wouldn't mind a delid, but I don't think that's something I want to attempt myself. Gonna try and see if I can find someone locally, who might be able to.
> 
> Regarding the crackling, I haven't had any issues yet. Only had the mobo for a few days though.


Yea its just so weird how a CPU gets 20c hotter on a loading screen than actual gameplay lol. This is my first AIO never happened with a big air cooler. As for delid i had silicon lottery do it, it was about the same price as me buying the actual materials, if you got a backup PC to use in the meantime i can definitely recommend them.


----------



## TheLastHero

Scotty99 said:


> Yea its just so weird how a CPU gets 20c hotter on a loading screen than actual gameplay lol. This is my first AIO never happened with a big air cooler. As for delid i had silicon lottery do it, it was about the same price as me buying the actual materials, if you got a backup PC to use in the meantime i can definitely recommend them.


With the shipping from Canada plus the cost of their service, I don't know if it would be worth it lol. Don't have a backup to use in the meantime either 



EDIT: I'm having an issue with numlock not turning on/staying on during boot. I have the option in the bios set to on, but it shuts off once it gets to the desktop. ROG Z370-F


----------



## ih2try

Scotty99 said:


> Yup its pretty lame. I will say tho ever since disabling fast boot and disabling/re-enabling my 1060 from device manager i dont believe ive heard crackling since.
> 
> As an aside how hot do yall's chips get when gaming? I cant believe how good this kraken x62 is, even in a game that uses the CPU it sits in the mid 40's with a 5.0ghz overclock with nearly 1.4v. I must have a really good mount or something, ive seen people with 420 rads saying mid 60's during gaming, they must not have a delid tho.
> 
> When i first got this x62 i was disappointed because i was only looking at max temps, turns out that ONLY happens when i first launch a game. During actual gameplay the numbers are phenomenal.


You mean after disabling fast boot there's still crackling sound (after sleep, I assume) so you have to disable/re-enable your gpu to get rid of it ?

About the temp, I can't even imagine how people are oc'ing the 8700k without delidding it. At stock setting, and mce disabled, with the Deepcool 240ex, my 8700k gets so close to 90*C before it throttles in stress test. And in game that doesn't use much of the CPU, it's usually round around *60C. In GTA, it's around 70*C. If you have delidded yours, that temp you get is still good but I'm not that surprised.



TheLastHero said:


> With the shipping from Canada plus the cost of their service, I don't know if it would be worth it lol. Don't have a backup to use in the meantime either
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: I'm having an issue with numlock not turning on/staying on during boot. I have the option in the bios set to on, but it shuts off once it gets to the desktop. ROG Z370-F


Sounds like an issue with Windows, Google says you can mess with Fast Boot and registry to try and fix it.


----------



## Scotty99

ih2try said:


> You mean after disabling fast boot there's still crackling sound (after sleep, I assume) so you have to disable/re-enable your gpu to get rid of it ?
> 
> About the temp, I can't even imagine how people are oc'ing the 8700k without delidding it. At stock setting, and mce disabled, with the Deepcool 240ex, my 8700k gets so close to 90*C before it throttles in stress test. And in game that doesn't use much of the CPU, it's usually round around *60C. In GTA, it's around 70*C. If you have delidded yours, that temp you get is still good but I'm not that surprised.
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like an issue with Windows, Google says you can mess with Fast Boot and registry to try and fix it.


Maybe i worded that wrong, i did both disable fast boot and reset my 1060 from device manager and the popping sounds have went away. Lame that there isnt a real fix yet but i guess this is acceptable.

And i agree about the delid part, i think 1.25v is about the limit people can push before running into throttling with mainstream coolers.


----------



## WiSH2oo0

Here is what my temps look like playing PubG.


----------



## Scotty99

Hmm wonder why mine are so low in comparison, maybe pubg stresses cpu more than destiny 2?


----------



## Yetyhunter

PUBG uses AVX which heats it up more. Not sure about Destiny 2 though.


----------



## Scotty99

Yetyhunter said:


> PUBG uses AVX which heats it up more. Not sure about Destiny 2 though.


Also has avx, which is the reason i decided to run no offset lol.


----------



## Nineball_Seraph

Does anyone know how effective the NVME heatsinks for the boards are (hero max X) compared to say the ek heatsink?


----------



## Scotty99

Nineball_Seraph said:


> Does anyone know how effective the NVME heatsinks for the boards are (hero max X) compared to say the ek heatsink?


Not sure about compared to EK but tech yes city ran a test vs other MSI:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwP3udC694U#t=15m40s


----------



## kevindd992002

Is there a reason why the Maximus X Code doesn't come with the bracket to mount a fan to blow over the NVMe area while the Maximus X Hero has one?


----------



## Merobh

*i5 8600k always at max frequency ?*

Hey guys, I'm relatively new to tweaking CPU frequency etc. (my i5 2500k was so easy to OC I never had any pb ) and I think I need help with my new i5 8600k. It is normal that it's always at max frequency even on desktop at few % usage ? I mean, no matter what frequency I use (tried 4.3ghz stock, then 4ghz just for testing), it's always at max. 
Multi-core enhancement is disabled, XMP profile is enable, with manual Core ratio settings to 4ghz at the moment. Temps are ok, less than 70°c full load, I'm waiting for a better cooler anyway. 
I read some things about turbo boost mode and C-states etc. but I don't understand much. 

Help would be really appreciated. 
PS : Sry for my english, not my native langage. 

Motherboard model: Asus Rog Strix Z370-G
UEFI Version:
CPU: i5 8600k
Memory kit part: 2*8 DDR4 3200mhz CL15
GPU: GTX 1060 6g
PSU: 550W Gold
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master MA410P 
PC CASE: Meshify C Mini
Any third Party temp/voltage software installed: HWmonitor


----------



## Bluecow003

kevindd992002 said:


> Is there a reason why the Maximus X Code doesn't come with the bracket to mount a fan to blow over the NVMe area while the Maximus X Hero has one?


The Code has a dedicated heatsink for the NVME and the Hero does not, right?


----------



## GeneO

Bluecow003 said:


> kevindd992002 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is there a reason why the Maximus X Code doesn't come with the bracket to mount a fan to blow over the NVMe area while the Maximus X Hero has one?
> 
> 
> 
> The Code has a dedicated heatsink for the NVME and the Hero does not, right?
Click to expand...

The hero does have a heatsink on one of its m.2. The second has optional fan mount. The Code primary has a heatsink, but he second m.2 plugs in perpendicular to the mb. It hangs out in space, so it is not possible to attach a fan anywhere. I thought I already answered this. Did my post dissapear?


----------



## lemniscate

Hi guys, my pc crashed earlier when I left it running firestrike ultra to test gpu overclock, now it won’t boot at all.

At first it showed 00 Q code, after searching around I tried removing the CMOS battery and run with a single memory stick at slot A2 (according to the manual it should be used for a single stick). Now it’s stuck at Q code 24, no video signal and the light next to the Q code is white. Any suggestion on what I should try, or what might be wrong here?


----------



## grifers

Which are the best bios version for asus z370-e gaming?. I think the lastest versions I need more voltage to make stable system. Im crazy?. First bios version (from december 2017), need 1.296 voltage to make 5ghz stable, now I need 1.328 :S

Before my settings are (adaptative voltage):

Aditional Vcore turbo - 1.170
Offset - + 0.010
LLC 5

Now (adaptative voltage):

ADitional Vcore turbo - 1.170
Offset - + 0.030 
LLC 5

Hope understand me, my english language to bad

P.D - Which voltage VCCIO and system Agent for my system? :

2 SSD in Raid
4 Seagate 2 TB in Raid
16 GB 2800 mhz cl16 at 1.2v


----------



## Jpmboy

lemniscate said:


> Hi guys, my pc crashed earlier when I left it running firestrike ultra to test gpu overclock, now it won’t boot at all.
> 
> At first it showed 00 Q code, after searching around I tried removing the CMOS battery and run with a single memory stick at slot A2 (according to the manual it should be used for a single stick). Now it’s stuck at Q code 24, no video signal and the light next to the Q code is white. Any suggestion on what I should try, or what might be wrong here?


What MB, CPU ram.. etc. plz add your rig to your sig.
what was the overclock on the cpu/ram while looping FSU? and what voltages were you running?
without more info (like is that led the CPU led??) first guess is the cpu is cooked.


grifers said:


> Which are the best bios version for asus z370-e gaming?. I think the lastest versions I need more voltage to make stable system. Im crazy?. First bios version (from december 2017), need 1.296 voltage to make 5ghz stable, now I need 1.328 :S
> 
> Before my settings are (adaptative voltage):
> 
> Aditional Vcore turbo - 1.170
> Offset - + 0.010
> LLC 5
> 
> Now (adaptative voltage):
> 
> ADitional Vcore turbo - 1.170
> Offset - + 0.030
> LLC 5
> 
> Hope understand me, my english language to bad
> 
> P.D - Which voltage VCCIO and system Agent for my system? :
> 
> 2 SSD in Raid
> 4 Seagate 2 TB in Raid
> 16 GB 2800 mhz cl16 at 1.2v


1.296V and 1.328V (as read by the OS I assume) are only 2 bins different (each vcore bin is 16mV) and this may not reflect the actual voltage. Only way to know for sure is a DMM reading. That said, unless the temps have increased accordingly, those voltage differences are not meaningful regarding cpu life or performance.
With ram at 2800, vsa and vccio can be left on auto. Both would be low and in the 1.1V range at 2800 ram. :thumb:


----------



## lemniscate

I was running 8700K with Maximus X Hero. Memories are corsair vengeance rgb 3466c16. Gpu is gigabyte 980ti g1 with custom bios (was in the middle of testing stability of the card when pc crashed).

Ran cpu at 5.0ghz, 1.35 vcore, 1.15 vccio, 1.20 vccsa. Memories were 3100mhz at 14-14-14-34, 1.35v. I’ve tested these clocks for stability with prime95 (both avx and non avx) and memtest86. Before getting stuck at Q code 24 it passed through the usual codes which would normally fail when my memory oc was unstable (32, with orange light for example), and when it gets stuck the Q led is white, which I believe should indicate gpu related issues?

I’m really tired atm, but later I’ll tear down my loop and try running on the integrated gpu to make sure whether the problem lies on the gpu or not.


----------



## grifers

Thanks @JmPboy


----------



## Jpmboy

lemniscate said:


> I was running 8700K with Maximus X Hero. Memories are corsair vengeance rgb 3466c16. Gpu is gigabyte 980ti g1 with custom bios (was in the middle of testing stability of the card when pc crashed).
> 
> Ran cpu at 5.0ghz, 1.35 vcore, 1.15 vccio, 1.20 vccsa. Memories were 3100mhz at 14-14-14-34, 1.35v. I’ve tested these clocks for stability with prime95 (both avx and non avx) and memtest86. Before getting stuck at Q code 24 it passed through the usual codes which would normally fail when my memory oc was unstable (32, with orange light for example), and when it gets stuck the Q led is white, which I believe should indicate gpu related issues?
> 
> I’m really tired atm, but later I’ll tear down my loop and try running on the integrated gpu to make sure whether the problem lies on the gpu or not.


unless 1.35V is "tamed" with LLC to allow for vdroop, there can be significant overshoot. That said, if you have not done so already, pull the cpu and re-seat it. mount your cooler, remove the 980ti, connect your monitor to the on-board graphics switch on/plug in the PSU, press the clrcmos button on the back of the Hero and try to fire it up.


----------



## kevindd992002

GeneO said:


> Bluecow003 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kevindd992002 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is there a reason why the Maximus X Code doesn't come with the bracket to mount a fan to blow over the NVMe area while the Maximus X Hero has one?
> 
> 
> 
> The Code has a dedicated heatsink for the NVME and the Hero does not, right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The hero does have a heatsink on one of its m.2. The second has optional fan mount. The Code primary has a heatsink, but he second m.2 plugs in perpendicular to the mb. It hangs out in space, so it is not possible to attach a fan anywhere. I thought I already answered this. Did my post dissapear?
Click to expand...

Yeah I thought you answered this a few days ago too. It looks like your post got deleted for some reason, I don't know.

EDIT: Ok I knoe what happened. I posted my original question on two different threads which you're both subscribed to 🙂


----------



## lemniscate

Jpmboy said:


> unless 1.35V is "tamed" with LLC to allow for vdroop, there can be significant overshoot. That said, if you have not done so already, pull the cpu and re-seat it. mount your cooler, remove the 980ti, connect your monitor to the on-board graphics switch on/plug in the PSU, press the clrcmos button on the back of the Hero and try to fire it up.


Sadly no luck with it, I’ve sent the board back to the local asus service centre and they’re going to take a look at it.

The only thing I can think of is using a different cpu (which I don’t have), or testing my cpu/gpu/ram on a different board (which I also don’t have). Since my cpu is delidded I can only try my luck with sending the board for rma. If they say the board is ok then I’ll have to get a new cpu.

Thanks a lot for the help, I feel really terrible about this. Hope it’s the board and they’ll replace it for me. Hero is like SGD500 (USD370) here, 8700K slightly more than that. Having to buy either one again would really suck.


----------



## superino

should I install Watercool HEATKILLER® IV Backplate INTEL 115X on Formula X?


----------



## the_real_7

guys what is the last bios on the Maximus X Hero thats does not have fix for spectre and meltdown I'm on 802 now


----------



## streetu

Hello Overclock.net community,

Recently i have purchased my first Asus motherboard, Z370-E Gaming, but im having some issues with it, hope somebody can give some tips.

1) Wifi issues, sometimes i loose conection to the internet randomly during the day, 10 minutes no internet, then 4 hours straight working fine.

No problem with router or my ISP, because my TV, Smarthphone, PS4, Laptop everything is fine.

Just did a fresh install of windows 10 april build, didnt mess with nothing, the wifi antenna is on the same place, 

2) Bios black screen (no video signal), sometimes when i enter the bios or exit the bios, i get no video signal, turning off and on the monitor doesnt do anything, i need to hard reset the PC.

This happened 3 times now.

I really dont know why this happens at all, sometimes i can go the bios 5 times straight, no problem. 

3) I usually turn off everything from eletricity at night in my house, is it ok to turn off the pc too? 

Im asking this because the motherboard rgb lights, usb mouse and usb keyboard stays on, even with the windows shut down.

So theres eletricity running trough the motherboard.

SPECS:

Windows 10 Pro April update 64bit
Dell s2716dg 144HZ 2K+
1080 GTX Gigabyte
DDR 4 3600Mhz CL16 Gskill 
Motherboard Asus Rog Strix Z370-E Gaming 
SSD 860 EVO 250GB
WD 1TB 7200rpm

Everything else besides those issues, everything is 100% fine.

Lastest drivers, bios installed.

Hope somebody can help me.

Thank you.


----------



## Jpmboy

streetu said:


> Hello Overclock.net community,
> 
> Recently i have purchased my first Asus motherboard, Z370-E Gaming, but im having some issues with it, hope somebody can give some tips.
> 
> 1) Wifi issues, sometimes i loose conection to the internet randomly during the day, 10 minutes no internet, then 4 hours straight working fine.
> 
> No problem with router or my ISP, because my TV, Smarthphone, PS4, Laptop everything is fine.
> 
> Just did a fresh install of windows 10 april build, didnt mess with nothing, the wifi antenna is on the same place,
> 
> 2) Bios no image, sometimes when i enter the bios or exit the bios, i get no image, turn off and on the monitor, no image, i have to hard reset the PC.
> 
> This happened 3 times now.
> 
> I really dont know why this happens at all, sometimes i can go the bios 5 times straight, no problem.
> 
> 3) I usually turn off everything from eletricity at night in my house, is it ok to turn off the pc too?
> 
> Im asking this because the motherboard rgb lights, usb mouse and usb keyboard stays on, even with the windows shut down.
> 
> So theres eletricity running trough the motherboard.
> 
> SPECS:
> 
> Windows 10 Pro April update 64bit
> Dell s2716dg 144HZ 2K+
> 1080 GTX Gigabyte
> DDR 4 3600Mhz CL16 Gskill
> Motherboard Asus Rog Strix Z370-E Gaming
> SSD 860 EVO 250GB
> WD 1TB 7200rpm
> 
> Everything else besides those issues, everything is 100% fine.
> 
> Lastest drivers, bios installed.
> 
> Hope somebody can help me.
> 
> Thank you.


I would disable windows driver updates, uninstall the driver using device manager and reinstall the Intel/realtech nic/wifi driver using the driver package from the ASUS support page for your board. Alternatively, uninstall the wifi driver using device manager (or the Apps and Features method) and try letting the device manger search for the driver in the driver base.

I'm not sure I understand the "Bios no image" thing...


----------



## streetu

Jpmboy said:


> I would disable windows driver updates, uninstall the driver using device manager and reinstall the Intel/realtech nic/wifi driver using the driver package from teh ASUS support page for your board. Alternatively, uninstall the wifi driver using device manager (or the Apps and Features method) and try letting the device manger search for the driver in the drivce base.
> 
> I'm not sure I understand the "Bios no image" thing...


Thank you for the reply,

I will try the Asus official driver for the wifi.

Regarding the "Bios no image", what im trying to say is, sometimes when i press DEL/F2 to enter bios, i get a black screen (no video signal), turning off and on the monitor doesnt do a thing, so i need to hard reset the PC.

One time, when quitting the bios with F10, no video signal too.

So this happens when entering or exiting the bios, randomly.


----------



## Jpmboy

I have seen that also on a couple of platforms (z270, z370, x299)... and always chalked it up to a marginally stable OC - usually happens here when "experimenting". Try increasing the DMI voltage a notch or two above the default value.


----------



## streetu

Jpmboy said:


> I have seen that also on a couple of platforms (z270, z370, x299)... and always chalked it up to a marginally stable OC - usually happens here when "experimenting". Try increasing the DMI voltage a notch or two above the default value.


Thank you for your feedback and reply,

Lastest Asus wifi driver is installed, blocked windows update drivers in the windows settings, but the windows wifi driver automatically install by themself always.

What i did was "update driver from folder" and driver installed with no problems, windows wifi driver is from 2016 and the asus one is from 2017, lets see if this does the trick. 

Regarding the bios issue, im using the default bios setting, no overclock at all, and i never overclocked in my life, so i dont know what DMI voltage is or wheres is located, i dont feel very comfortable on trying to change / mess with those things.

The other cases you have seen, z270, z370, x299, with no video signal on bios, were related to overclock only? 

P.S

The motherboard, mouse, keyboard rgb lights are still on even after windows shutdown, i like it, but when i go to bed i turn my UPS off and cuts power to every device.

Is it safe for the PC, if i turn my UPS off, even if the rbg lights are on?


----------



## Jpmboy

streetu said:


> Thank you for your feedback and reply,
> 
> Lastest Asus wifi driver is installed, blocked windows update drivers in the windows settings, but the windows wifi driver automatically install by themself always.
> 
> What i did was "update driver from folder" and driver installed with no problems, windows wifi driver is from 2016 and the asus one is from 2017, lets see if this does the trick.
> 
> Regarding the bios issue, im using the default bios setting, no overclock at all, and i never overclocked in my life, so i dont know what DMI voltage is or wheres is located, i dont feel very comfortable on trying to change / mess with those things.
> 
> *The other cases you have seen, z270, z370, x299, with no video signal on bios, were related to overclock only? *
> 
> P.S
> 
> The motherboard, mouse, keyboard rgb lights are still on even after windows shutdown, i like it, but when i go to bed i turn my UPS off and cuts power to every device.
> 
> Is it safe for the PC, if i turn my UPS off, even if the rbg lights are on?


lol - yeah, I've never run at stock clocks. 
For the RGB lights, you can either set them to "Off" when the system is off/sleep/hibernate in bios or using the ASUS Aura software "Shutdown" and "Off".


----------



## Yetyhunter

I finally managed to stabilise my overclock at 5Ghz. One small issue I have is that during idle the voltage will never go under 1.232. The CPU downclocks at 800mhz just fine but the voltage is fixed at 1.232, I believe it should be at 1.0v +-.

And another strange thing, every time I boot up the screen flashes allot after the BIOS post, it looks like it's turning on and off 5 or 6 times really fast until the windows loading screen shows.

Any help is appreciated.


----------



## Jpmboy

Yetyhunter said:


> I finally managed to stabilise my overclock at 5Ghz. One small issue I have is that during idle the voltage will never go under 1.232. The CPU downclocks at 800mhz just fine but the voltage is fixed at 1.232, I believe it should be at 1.0v +-.
> 
> And another strange thing, every time I boot up the screen flashes allot after the BIOS post, it looks like it's turning on and off 5 or 6 times really fast until the windows loading screen shows.
> 
> Any help is appreciated.


are you using adaptive or manual override for vcore?


----------



## Yetyhunter

I am using adaptive mode, so SVID is on.


----------



## Jpmboy

Yetyhunter said:


> I am using adaptive mode, so SVID is on.


On windows 10, in bios disable Speedstep and enable speedshift. set CPUSVID on Auto. It is behaving as tho you are using manual override. Check that the windows power plan is Balanced.


----------



## Yetyhunter

Jpmboy said:


> On windows 10, in bios disable Speedstep and enable speedshift. set CPUSVID on Auto. It is behaving as tho you are using manual override. Check that the windows power plan is Balanced.


Thank you. I will try that as soon as I get home. Setting the power plan to balanced, wouldn't that cause additional delay/ stuttering because of frequent clock change while in-game?


----------



## Jpmboy

Yetyhunter said:


> Thank you. I will try that as soon as I get home. Setting the power plan to balanced, wouldn't that cause additional delay/ stuttering because of frequent clock change while in-game?


That's the thing with speedshift (p-state control at the hardware level) it is faster. But, if you think you see dynamic clock effects while gaming, either run manual vcore and disable both step and shift (max performance) or just select windows hi perf mode before gaming with shift disabled and step enabled. that said, once you use shift, windows power plan does not do the same thing anymore.
oh - and when using shift, you need to have c-state C6 enabled. shift uses the c6 comm for control... so enable c-states up to and including c6. (yes, when using adaptive vcore). :thumb:
I find that 'shift performs better when set up correctly and the system down clocks and down volts at idle. load transition based clock changes are quicker.


----------



## FloorPizza

scracy said:


> If VRM temperature appears in the monitor tab of the UEFI then AIDA64 will be able to display VRM temperature in Windows, I use AIDA64 sidebar gadget to monitor everything


Great idea. I keep HWInfo loaded and minimized all the time. It would be nice to have a gadget displaying the stuff I like to keep an eye on. HWInfo might even have something like this.. i'll have to look.

Thanks for the heads up!


----------



## Yetyhunter

Jpmboy said:


> That's the thing with speedshift (p-state control at the hardware level) it is faster. But, if you think you see dynamic clock effects while gaming, either run manual vcore and disable both step and shift (max performance) or just select windows hi perf mode before gaming with shift disabled and step enabled. that said, once you use shift, windows power plan does not do the same thing anymore.
> oh - and when using shift, you need to have c-state C6 enabled. shift uses the c6 comm for control... so enable c-states up to and including c6. (yes, when using adaptive vcore). :thumb:
> I find that 'shift performs better when set up correctly and the system down clocks and down volts at idle. load transition based clock changes are quicker.


I figured it out. I had to set it to max power-saving. There is that one setting. Will test for stability tomorrow.


----------



## pyra

hi guys, 

instead of started a new thread somewhere i figured this group might know the answer.....

I'm thinking of ordering this cpu block https://www.ekwb.com/configurator/waterblock/3831109821701 for my Asus strix z370- F

My only concern is now i have delidded my cpu the IHS will be sitting slightly lower and i was worried the CPU part of the cold plate might not make contact as well as it should, it doesn't really matter with my current cpu only block (XSPC Raystorm) but i was thinking i might be a problem with this full cover block due to part of the block sitting on the VRMs

Anyone with any experience with this block on a delidded CPU?


----------



## SpeedyIV

FloorPizza said:


> Great idea. I keep HWInfo loaded and minimized all the time. It would be nice to have a gadget displaying the stuff I like to keep an eye on. HWInfo might even have something like this.. i'll have to look.
> 
> Thanks for the heads up!


You could try SIV (System Information Viewer). If it can be monitored, SIV can report it. You can setup custom "LCD Panels" in SIV. Here is a sample of what can be done. This is an old screen shot and the panel setup was not complete but it conveys the idea. You can add any parameter available to the panels. You can also set up ranges for the values and have the data change colors based on the current values. This picture is static but the actual data displayed changes color in real time based on the current values verses thresholds you set up. SIV is very stable and very efficient, using very little CPU overhead. It can also control Corsair Link products. The author of SIV is buddies with the authors of HWINFO and AIDA64. They often help each other out with new platforms, and have agreed on certain standards to allow their programs to access the SMB buss without causing conflicts.


Here is a link to the SIV authors web page. There are download links there. SIV can be a bit confusing at first. I highly recommend reading the setup guide as you will not figure out how to set up these LCD panels without it. There is also a support forum on Google Plus here.

http://rh-software.com/
https://plus.google.com/communities/108172397435354888336


----------



## scracy

FloorPizza said:


> Great idea. I keep HWInfo loaded and minimized all the time. It would be nice to have a gadget displaying the stuff I like to keep an eye on. HWInfo might even have something like this.. i'll have to look.
> 
> Thanks for the heads up!


No problem there is a HwInfo gadget that displays some of the stuff you want to monitor but it is not as comprehensive or customiseable as the AIDA64 gadget


----------



## Jpmboy

AID64 is very good, but is not yet reading all ASUS z370 or x299 sensors, nor Gigabyte x299. SIV64 is very awkward, but so far is reading all sensors from these platforms... not as polished as AID, but then it is FREE!


----------



## lemniscate

Jpmboy said:


> unless 1.35V is "tamed" with LLC to allow for vdroop, there can be significant overshoot. That said, if you have not done so already, pull the cpu and re-seat it. mount your cooler, remove the 980ti, connect your monitor to the on-board graphics switch on/plug in the PSU, press the clrcmos button on the back of the Hero and try to fire it up.


Just a heads up, I sent my board for RMA, and they replaced it in 2 days because they don't have a coffee lake chip to test it lol. Now the system is up and running well (even better memory overclock it seems, for whatever reason). Thanks a lot, Jpmboy.

On a side note, I can't seem to find my VRM temp anywhere, it used to show up in hwinfo but not anymore. After a bit of searching it seems like some of these X hero boards don't read VRM temp at all, kinda disappointing but not really a big deal I guess.


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm having an issue where Speed Shift seems to be only working with Throttle Stop running.

If I close it, CPU speeds static at 5.1GHZ.

I have C-States on Auto, Speed Shift enabled and Speed Step disabled.

Any suggestions? @Jpmboy


----------



## SpeedyIV

lemniscate said:


> Just a heads up, I sent my board for RMA, and they replaced it in 2 days because they don't have a coffee lake chip to test it lol. Now the system is up and running well (even better memory overclock it seems, for whatever reason). Thanks a lot, Jpmboy.
> 
> On a side note, I can't seem to find my VRM temp anywhere, it used to show up in hwinfo but not anymore. After a bit of searching it seems like some of these X hero boards don't read VRM temp at all, kinda disappointing but not really a big deal I guess.


My Maximus X Hero WIFI does NOT and has never reported VRM temp, at least with BIOS 0802, 1003, and 1101. I have not tried 1301 yet. Yes there were a lot of posts about it awhile back and a thread on the ROG forum about it too. Asus reps refused to comment or acknowledge the issue in any way. I have been told by the authors of AIDA and HWINFO that Asus changed a component in the VRM section that resulted in the loss of VRM temp reporting, though no one from Asus would confirm or deny that. I searched ans found hlaf a dozen reviews that included BIOS screen shots. None of them showed any VRM temps, and interestingly, none of the reviewers even mentioned it. I was beginning to think that the Maximus X Hero boards never reported VRM temp but then finally, someone posted an AIDA screen shot and there it was. As I understand it, if it is not present in the BIOS, it will not be reported by any monitoring utility. I mainly use SIV. If SIV does not report it, it's not there. Asus site still shows a thermometer over the VRMs, though it never actually states that VRM temp is monitored. Pretty crappy of Asus, but what can you do. I stuck a temp probe up under the VRM heat sink and the readings I get seem reasonable, though I really have no way of confirming accuracy. YMMV...


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> I'm having an issue where Speed Shift seems to be only working with Throttle Stop running.
> If I close it, CPU speeds static at 5.1GHZ.
> I have *C-States on Auto*, Speed Shift enabled and Speed Step disabled.
> Any suggestions? @*Jpmboy*


win version 1709 or higher (1803)?
Enable c-states rather that Auto.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> win version 1709 or higher (1803)?
> Enable c-states rather than Auto.


1803, I have Minimum Processor State at 0% in Power Options.

Yes, and I had C-States enabled.


----------



## streetu

Jpmboy said:


> lol - yeah, I've never run at stock clocks.
> For the RGB lights, you can either set them to "Off" when the system is off/sleep/hibernate in bios or using the ASUS Aura software "Shutdown" and "Off".


I see, but since i run everything at stock, what could be causing the lost of video signal on BIOS?

As for the Wi Fi issue, its a bit too soon to celebrate, but it seems your advice for installing the asus wifi driver did the trick, but i need a few more days to be really certain that it is fixed.

Regarding the RGB lights of the motherboard, yeah i know i could do it manually on bios or software, but i do enjoy the rgb lights and i dont want to keep turning off and on, everytime i shutdown or turn on the PC - i just turn the UPS off, cuts down power.

Even, if i turn off the motherboard rgb lights manually, the rgb lights from the usb keyboard and usb mouse are still on, i did try to turn it off on BIOS, in ErP settings but guess what happened:

- RGB still on keyboard and mouse after shutdown

- No RGB on motherboard and cpu cooler after i turn on the PC 

:blinksmil

So, my question is, is it safe to turn the UPS off after windows shutdown, even if the RGB lights are on? because it looks to me that is the easiest and simple solution.


----------



## Jpmboy

streetu said:


> I see, but since i run everything at stock, what could be causing the lost of video signal on BIOS?
> 
> As for the Wi Fi issue, its a bit too soon to celebrate, but it seems your advice for installing the asus wifi driver did the trick, but i need a few more days to be really certain that it is fixed.
> 
> Regarding the RGB lights of the motherboard, yeah i know i could do it manually on bios or software, but i do enjoy the rgb lights and i dont want to keep turning off and on, everytime i shutdown or turn on the PC - i just turn the UPS off, cuts down power.
> 
> Even, if i turn off the motherboard rgb lights manually, the rgb lights from the usb keyboard and usb mouse are still on, i did try to turn it off on BIOS, in ErP settings but guess what happened:
> 
> - RGB still on keyboard and mouse after shutdown
> 
> - No RGB on motherboard and cpu cooler after i turn on the PC
> 
> :blinksmil
> 
> *So, my question is, is it safe to turn the UPS off after windows shutdown, even if the RGB lights are on? because it looks to me that is the easiest and simple solution*.


except for any, if any connected devices that run off the 5V standby, i don;t think so. not sure.


----------



## streetu

Jpmboy said:


> except for any, if any connected devices that run off the 5V standby, i don;t think so. not sure.


I think im going to call asus support to see what they say about this, any other way of shutting off the USB besides the ErP settings?

Theres an option in the bios, to disable the usb permentaly, but of course thats not a solution.


----------



## Jpmboy

next time get a keyboard and mouse without lights.


----------



## streetu

Jpmboy said:


> next time get a keyboard and mouse without lights.


But i do enjoy the rgb on keyboard and mouse, but not at night lol


----------



## lemniscate

SpeedyIV said:


> My Maximus X Hero WIFI does NOT and has never reported VRM temp, at least with BIOS 0802, 1003, and 1101. I have not tried 1301 yet. Yes there were a lot of posts about it awhile back and a thread on the ROG forum about it too. Asus reps refused to comment or acknowledge the issue in any way. I have been told by the authors of AIDA and HWINFO that Asus changed a component in the VRM section that resulted in the loss of VRM temp reporting, though no one from Asus would confirm or deny that. I searched ans found hlaf a dozen reviews that included BIOS screen shots. None of them showed any VRM temps, and interestingly, none of the reviewers even mentioned it. I was beginning to think that the Maximus X Hero boards never reported VRM temp but then finally, someone posted an AIDA screen shot and there it was. As I understand it, if it is not present in the BIOS, it will not be reported by any monitoring utility. I mainly use SIV. If SIV does not report it, it's not there. Asus site still shows a thermometer over the VRMs, though it never actually states that VRM temp is monitored. Pretty crappy of Asus, but what can you do. I stuck a temp probe up under the VRM heat sink and the readings I get seem reasonable, though I really have no way of confirming accuracy. YMMV...


My previous X hero (non wifi) reported VRM temp, it appeared under Asus EC in hwinfo, and I don't recall ever seeing it in the bios. I guess the claim that they changed some components in the VRM section might be true then, assuming my replacement board was from the newer batches, while my old board was from the older batches prior to the change.


----------



## bl4ckdot

My X Formula also displays VRM temp under Asus EC in hwinfo. Nothing in BIOS.


----------



## petrakeas

The power led (orange color) on the motheboard is always on. Even if the computer is shut down normally and no USB devices are connected. Is this the default behavior?

I have set the other LEDs to turn off using the UEFI setting and it works. However, that power led will never go off.


----------



## Jpmboy

petrakeas said:


> The power led (orange color) on the motheboard is always on. Even if the computer is shut down normally and not USB devices are connected. Is this the default behavior?
> 
> I have set the other LEDs to turn off using the UEFI setting and it works. However, that power led will never go off.


yes, it is normal



KedarWolf said:


> 1803, I have Minimum Processor State at 0% in Power Options.
> 
> Yes, and I had C-States enabled.


I've been trying to replicate with no luck. In windows power plan, is the cooling policy set to Active (default) or Passive? I wonder if throttle stop (which I do not have) is messing with us? Why would enabling throttle Stop cause it to down-clock (throttle)?


----------



## streetu

petrakeas said:


> The power led (orange color) on the motheboard is always on. Even if the computer is shut down normally and no USB devices are connected. Is this the default behavior?
> 
> I have set the other LEDs to turn off using the UEFI setting and it works. However, that power led will never go off.


Did you turned off the RGB on the motherboard too?



Jpmboy said:


> yes, it is normal


I have been testing different motherboard RGB modes on Aura Sync, now i cant remember the original factory RGB mode of the motherboard, do you know the name or is there a way to reset the RGB back to factory mode?

Tried to unnistall the Aura Sync app, but the PC remembers the last mode i used on Aura Sync.


----------



## Jpmboy

streetu said:


> Did you turned off the RGB on the motherboard too?
> 
> 
> 
> I have been testing different motherboard RGB modes on Aura Sync, now i cant remember the original factory RGB mode of the motherboard, do you know the name or is there a way to reset the RGB back to factory mode?
> 
> Tried to unnistall the Aura Sync app, but the PC remembers the last mode i used on Aura Sync.


best way is to clrcmos... but you can change the bios settings under on board devices for the On and OFF/Sleep states. Be sure to disable the ASUS Aura service in windows if you want to stop Aura.


----------



## streetu

Jpmboy said:


> best way is to clrcmos... but you can change the bios settings under on board devices for the On and OFF/Sleep states. Be sure to disable the ASUS Aura service in windows if you want to stop Aura.


Just tried to end the aura service no luck, how to clear cmos?

Is this the jumper cap?

https://imgur.com/a/L3tQ3aN


----------



## Jpmboy

streetu said:


> Just tried to end the aura service no luck, how to clear cmos?
> 
> Is this the jumper cap?
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/L3tQ3aN


 what mb


----------



## streetu

Jpmboy said:


> what mb


z370-e gaming


----------



## Jpmboy

streetu said:


> z370-e gaming


no clrcmos button and no bios flash back for that board... yeah, you have to short the RTC header for 5 sec or so... or pull the battery for 5 min.

thats a thermocouple (temp sensor). you can use tweezers or a paperclip - and a steady hand.


----------



## reboot_me

*Z370-G AC voltage question*

Hi, 

I´m trying to dial in the settings for an 8700K and it gets kind of high in voltage, auto gets to 1.3-1.4 and adaptive goes past that. 
Is there a way to get an offset on adaptive that i less then +0.250, I´d like to be able to get 1.3-1.35, even when in turbo boost, but I´d like to have speedstep enabled, so normal offset is to much of an headache, I´d like to run adaptive, but for some reason it´s locked for a rather high positive offset, why?

I can get maybe 125w away from the CPU before noise an temperature goes high, past 80C.
Reseated the Noctua twice, delid isn´t an option. 

help....

EDIT

Fixed, the IA AC/DC load line was set to auto so the adaptive voltage didn´t take right, now it´s set "right" to 1.3 so it´s peaking at 1.35 under prime. IA AC/DC at 0.01 did the trick.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> yes, it is normal
> 
> 
> 
> I've been trying to replicate with no luck. In windows power plan, is the cooling policy set to Active (default) or Passive? I wonder if throttle stop (which I do not have) is messing with us? Why would enabling throttle Stop cause it to down-clock (throttle)?


Don't I want it to downclock when idle?

I noticed without Throttle Stop even though the clock speeds stay at 5.1GHZ the CPU voltage will lower to .700v with Speed Shift.

Yes, Active Cooling is enabled.


----------



## encrypted11

Have you tried (yet again ) the Elmor stuff?
http://www.overclock.net/forum/25827483-post3.html


----------



## feznz

KedarWolf said:


> Don't I want it to downclock when idle?
> 
> I noticed without Throttle Stop even though the clock speeds stay at 5.1GHZ the CPU voltage will lower to .700v with Speed Shift.
> 
> Yes, Active Cooling is enabled.


I had that happen on the 801 original Bios


----------



## wingman99

Thinking of purchasing the ASUS Prime Z370-P. Does the Core voltage offset work well and does it have AVX offset? Do other ASUS Z370s have adaptive turbo settings because I did not see it for the ASUS Prime Z370-P?


----------



## GAN77

Guys, your views on the new bios?

Improve OC performance
Improve system stability


----------



## TheLastHero

GAN77 said:


> Guys, your views on the new bios?
> 
> Improve OC performance
> Improve system stability


Hard to say, no OC increase from last version. Had to bump up my voltage a tad, just to keep the same settings stable.


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> Don't I want it to downclock when idle?
> 
> I noticed without Throttle Stop even though the clock speeds stay at 5.1GHZ the CPU voltage will lower to .700v with Speed Shift.
> 
> Yes, Active Cooling is enabled.


something funky is going on. post up a bios txt file...


----------



## wingman99

TheLastHero said:


> Hard to say, no OC increase from last version. Had to bump up my voltage a tad, just to keep the same settings stable.


Were you using fixed Vcore that you had to bump up? When you update the BIOS can you use saved profiles on a USB drive from the previous BIOS version?


----------



## TheLastHero

wingman99 said:


> Were you using fixed Vcore that you had to bump up? When you update the BIOS can you use saved profiles on a USB drive from the previous BIOS version?


Had to bump the Vcore, and I wasn't able to use saved OC profiles from the USB sadly.


----------



## Jpmboy

TheLastHero said:


> Had to bump the Vcore, and I wasn't able to use saved OC profiles from the USB sadly.



Were OC profiles (saved) ever portable between bios versions? Not on any of the last 6-7 generations of ASUS boards DT or HEDT.


----------



## TheLastHero

Jpmboy said:


> Were OC profiles (saved) ever portable between bios versions? Not on any of the last 6-7 generations of ASUS boards DT or HEDT.


No idea, this was my first time trying. Sucks that it doesn't work....cause that would be too convenient right? lol


----------



## Jpmboy

TheLastHero said:


> No idea, this was my first time trying. Sucks that it doesn't work....cause that would be too convenient right? lol


certainly would limit "improvements" to any new bios if it required backward compatibility. but yeah. it is a PIA to loose a bunch of save configurations. Tho, unless something is not working right, why update anyway?


----------



## Scotty99

Has anyone tried the 0616 bios for the strix f? It denotes "improved OC performance" im curious if they finally fixed adaptive or maybe tweaked the 5.0ghz bios preset? My oc is so good i really dont wanna update lol.


----------



## apw63

Not sure if this has been asked in this tread or not, sorry if it has and Ive missed it. Will the Z370 MB preform a system shut down on CPU fan header failure in windows? I would like to hook the Aquearo speed sense to the CPU fan header. I think I can then tad that to the flow rate. IF the flow rate goes to zero, the Aquearo sends a no speed or CPU fan faliure to the MB.


----------



## Jpmboy

apw63 said:


> Not sure if this has been asked in this tread or not, sorry if it has and Ive missed it. Will the Z370 MB preform a system shut down on CPU fan header failure in windows? I would like to hook the Aquearo speed sense to the CPU fan header. I think I can then tad that to the flow rate. IF the flow rate goes to zero, the Aquearo sends a no speed or CPU fan faliure to the MB.


you just will get a CPU fan error at startup AFAIK. If you have an Aquaero, the right way to do this is to buy the $20 ATX adapter so the AQ can alarm or shut down the rig with any number of conditions met (flow, temps, etc). I use the ATX power adapter on two rigs. One qith an AQ6, the other has an external 720XT cooling tower.


----------



## apw63

Jpmboy said:


> you just will get a CPU fan error at startup AFAIK. If you have an Aquaero, the right way to do this is to buy the $20 ATX adapter so the AQ can alarm or shut down the rig with any number of conditions met (flow, temps, etc). I use the ATX power adapter on two rigs. One qith an AQ6, the other has an external 720XT cooling tower.


Can also do it without the ATX adapter as in attached photo. I have the terminal to do it this way. I was just wondering if there was an easier way. 

So what happens when windows is running and a cpu fan fails?


----------



## Jpmboy

apw63 said:


> Can also do it without the ATX adapter as in attached photo. I have the terminal to do it this way. I was just wondering if there was an easier way.
> 
> So what happens when windows is running and a cpu fan fails?



yes, you can wire the relay yourself, it's easy. If you go thru the ATX you can program a controlled shut down (for instance by linking in the relay from most of the better UPS's, or a immediate ATX break (which is what it is, a power cut). AFAIK, once in the OS nothing happens if the cpu fan header sees zero rpm absent something like speedfan or other OS-based tools with WMI interface. easy to know - right? just unplug the cpu fan from the header.


----------



## feznz

I thought if you had zero flow then the CPU would hit 100° and trigger an automatic shut down thats what happened with the Maximus 5 when I forgot to plug in the 24v PSU for the water pump on a number of occasions..... not ideal but it works.


----------



## wingman99

The Coffee lake CPU throttles at 100c and shuts down above that temperature.


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> I thought if you had zero flow then the CPU would hit 100° and trigger an automatic shut down thats what happened with the Maximus 5 when I forgot to plug in the 24v PSU for the water pump on a number of occasions..... not ideal but it works.



yes, you wil trip "proc_hot" at some point. The idea is to have the system shut down before that happens.


----------



## THC Butterz

im having a aura issue with my z370-f gaming, aura detects everything in my system except my board, it was working until i updated aura yesterday, i have the latest bios 0616 i think, tried every aura version and even reset the bios to default and clean installed windows 10 ver 1803... aura controlls my ram but my board is just stuck color cycling in every aura version, tried every suggestion i could find with google, toggling on/off in bios, disabling csm, even unblocking the apps in the io folder before installing... no luck, any help would be awesome, tired of seeing my motherboard spit unicorn vomit, thanks


----------



## Scotty99

THC Butterz said:


> im having a aura issue with my z370-f gaming, aura detects everything in my system except my board, it was working until i updated aura yesterday, i have the latest bios 0616 i think, tried every aura version and even reset the bios to default and clean installed windows 10 ver 1803... aura controlls my ram but my board is just stuck color cycling in every aura version, tried every suggestion i could find with google, toggling on/off in bios, disabling csm, even unblocking the apps in the io folder before installing... no luck, any help would be awesome, tired of seeing my motherboard spit unicorn vomit, thanks


Reinstall it using "setup" not "asus setup", that worked for me with the same problem.


----------



## wingman99

What is going wrong when I'm using the ASUS BIOS it is very laggy sometimes?


----------



## WiSH2oo0

I just picked up a Samsung 970 Pro and I was wondering if these scores look ok? I'm using socket M.2_2 set at x4 speed, M.2_1 is set to PCIe(instead of Auto) and all SATA ports disabled. I also installed the drivers from Samsung's website during my fresh Windows 10 Pro install.


----------



## wingman99

I was in the ASUS BIOS saving profiles to USB drive and the BIOS froze, then I had to power reset to reboot back to BIOS setup. Does this sort of thing happen with ASUS sometimes.


----------



## Jpmboy

WiSH2oo0 said:


> I just picked up a Samsung 970 Pro and I was wondering if these scores look ok? I'm using socket M.2_2 set at x4 speed, M.2_1 is set to PCIe(instead of Auto) and all SATA ports disabled. I also installed the drivers from Samsung's website during my fresh Windows 10 Pro install.


damn - the 970 is quick!!


----------



## WiSH2oo0

Okay thanks Jpmboy, 

I never really paid much attention to storage drive benchmarks and just bought what had good reviews. So I'm still not sure what the numbers mean but I know that the Samsung Pro drives have been towards the top in performance.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Hello, 
I'm having a minor (but annoying) issue with my Formula X. 
Randomly (like 1 or 2 time per hour) the fans connected to CHA_FAN3 (front rad) will spin up very fast for half a second for no reason. They are linked to CPU temp, same as the top radiator that doesn't seem to have the issue.

Fan config in bios : 
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Step Up [12 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Step Down [12 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 3 Upper Temperature [59]
Chassis Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Chassis Fan 3 Middle Temperature [39]
Chassis Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [45]
Chassis Fan 3 Lower Temperature [20]
Chassis Fan 3 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [43]

Any idea ?


----------



## THC Butterz

WiSH2oo0 said:


> I just picked up a Samsung 970 Pro and I was wondering if these scores look ok? I'm using socket M.2_2 set at x4 speed, M.2_1 is set to PCIe(instead of Auto) and all SATA ports disabled. I also installed the drivers from Samsung's website during my fresh Windows 10 Pro install.


here is my 960 evo bench run for reference


----------



## WiSH2oo0

THC Butterz said:


> here is my 960 evo bench run for reference


Thanks Butterz,

Like I said I don't know much about the numbers. If I look at your scores vs mine I would think that you'd have the better drive because of your read times. I'd think it would be better to have faster read times then write times for accessing the drive for loading games and such. I don't know.

I was wondering just in case I had to move my Pro 970 to the M.2_1 slot if my benchmark performance wasn't up to specs.


----------



## scracy

bl4ckdot said:


> Hello,
> I'm having a minor (but annoying) issue with my Formula X.
> Randomly (like 1 or 2 time per hour) the fans connected to CHA_FAN3 (front rad) will spin up very fast for half a second for no reason. They are linked to CPU temp, same as the top radiator that doesn't seem to have the issue.
> 
> Fan config in bios :
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 3 Step Up [12 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Step Down [12 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
> Chassis Fan 3 Upper Temperature [59]
> Chassis Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> Chassis Fan 3 Middle Temperature [39]
> Chassis Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [45]
> Chassis Fan 3 Lower Temperature [20]
> Chassis Fan 3 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [43]
> 
> Any idea ?


Which UEFI Version? Im still running 1003 and have not had that issue, are you sure it is not a background process causing a random spike in CPU temp? Try changing ramp up/down to 25 seconds


----------



## bl4ckdot

scracy said:


> Which UEFI Version? Im still running 1003 and have not had that issue, are you sure it is not a background process causing a random spike in CPU temp? Try changing ramp up/down to 25 seconds


Latest version, 1301 if I recall correctly. I monitor the temps, and when this happens there is no spike. I tried increasing it but that doesn't change anything 
It happens on idle too.


----------



## scracy

bl4ckdot said:


> ​Latest version, 1301 if I recall correctly. I monitor the temps, and when this happens there is no spike. I tried increasing it but that doesn't change anything
> It happens on idle too.


Perhaps a bug in the UEFI? Does 1301 show VRM temperatures under the monitor tab?


----------



## bl4ckdot

scracy said:


> Perhaps a bug in the UEFI? Does 1301 show VRM temperatures under the monitor tab?


Only on HWInfo.


----------



## scracy

bl4ckdot said:


> Only on HWInfo.


Same with 1003 regarding Hwinfo, perhaps go back one or two UEFI versions to solve the problem with random fan ramp up, as I stated I haven't had the issue you are experiencing with 1003.


----------



## CRJ84

Why is Asus not updating Intel Management Engine Driver and Intel Chipset driver?

On MSI's driver page ME driver is 11.7.0.1067 - 2018/05/17
And Chipset driver 10.1.17541.8066 - 2018/05/16

MSI Godlike z370

Asus driver page 

ME Version 11.7.0.1045 - 2017/12/26
Chipset Version 10.1.1.45 - 2017/12/26

This is from Hero x z370

Is it safe to download the MSI versions?


----------



## feznz

I've been thinking about flashing back to 1101 current 1301 has been flashing every Q code possible ..... don't seem to have any issues that I am aware of .... 1101 was my preferred BIOS


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> I've been thinking about flashing back to 1101 current 1301 has been flashing every Q code possible ..... don't seem to have any issues that I am aware of .... 1101 was my preferred BIOS


nothing wrong with doing so. I've been running 1301 with no issues... so far.


----------



## feznz

Jpmboy said:


> nothing wrong with doing so. I've been running 1301 with no issues... so far.


I just rolled back to1101 just happy to see AO on the Qcode I not sure when the random Qcodes started to appear I only noticed it a few days ago did have the Qcode 40 with 1101 but that was related to the windows fast start up setting 
But always liked Bios 1101 better than 1301 and has the microcode Spectre fix


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> I just rolled back to1101 just happy to see AO on the Qcode I not sure when the random Qcodes started to appear I only noticed it a few days ago did have the Qcode 40 with 1101 but that was related to the windows fast start up setting
> But always liked Bios 1101 better than 1301 and has the microcode Spectre fix


was the q-code LED set to "POst Only" in bios? If yes, the readout was the CPU PECI temperature.


----------



## wingman99

I have a problem with my ASUS Z370 PC waking up on it's own from sleep. I disabled wake timers and LAN wake up. I don't know what else to try?


----------



## feznz

Jpmboy said:


> was the q-code LED set to "POst Only" in bios? If yes, the readout was the CPU PECI temperature.



Would have been default of auto but doubt it was temp as it had no logical relationship to CPU temp I.e. with prime load it would display 24 though to 59 I could only dream of those temps 

What ever it was displaying it was a set amount of codes 23,24,25,26 54,56 were the main ones all memory related codes 



wingman99 said:


> I have a problem with my ASUS Z370 PC waking up on it's own from sleep. I disabled wake timers and LAN wake up. I don't know what else to try?



people actually use sleep these days I still debate which is quicker cold boot or wake up


----------



## wingman99

feznz said:


> Would have been default of auto but doubt it was temp as it had no logical relationship to CPU temp I.e. with prime load it would display 24 though to 59 I could only dream of those temps
> 
> What ever it was displaying it was a set amount of codes 23,24,25,26 54,56 were the main ones all memory related codes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people actually use sleep these days I still debate which is quicker cold boot or wake up


Wake up is less than a millisecond with all my applications still open. There is no debate give it a try.:thumb:


----------



## ahoslc

SO I have a Strix Z370-I during prime 95 and real bench after about 5mins my 5ghz clocks drop to 3.7 then shoot back up to 5ghz. My temps are fine I am delided with X62 staying in Mid 60's. 

5ghz 1.315v LLC 6 Max power turned on etc


Do you think it's vrm throttling going on?


----------



## wingman99

ahoslc said:


> SO I have a Strix Z370-I during prime 95 and real bench after about 5mins my 5ghz clocks drop to 3.7 then shoot back up to 5ghz. My temps are fine I am delided with X62 staying in Mid 60's.
> 
> 5ghz 1.315v LLC 6 Max power turned on etc
> 
> 
> Do you think it's vrm throttling going on?


You could test to see if the VRM is throttling. Place a house fan point to the VRM on the side with the open case PC.


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> Would have been default of auto but doubt it was temp as it had no logical relationship to CPU temp I.e. with prime load it would display 24 though to 59 I could only dream of those temps
> 
> What ever it was displaying it was a set amount of codes 23,24,25,26 54,56 were the main ones all memory related codes
> wow - no idea what was going on there. That said, the q-core panel will report cpu peci, which will not be the same as cpu temp based on TJ max, package or any other. It's an ASUS EC report.
> 
> 
> 
> people actually use sleep these days I still debate which is quicker cold boot or wake up





ahoslc said:


> SO I have a Strix Z370-I during prime 95 and real bench after about 5mins my 5ghz clocks drop to 3.7 then shoot back up to 5ghz. My temps are fine I am delided with X62 staying in Mid 60's.
> 5ghz 1.315v LLC 6 Max power turned on etc
> Do you think it's vrm throttling going on?


is the avx offset on "Auto" in bios?


----------



## feznz

wingman99 said:


> Wake up is less than a millisecond with all my applications still open. There is no debate give it a try.:thumb:



actully I give you one there it is fairly fast but not miliseconds fast I would say 10sec but still probably more the fact bumping something wakes it up


----------



## wingman99

feznz said:


> actully I give you one there it is fairly fast but not miliseconds fast I would say 10sec but still probably more the fact bumping something wakes it up


I don't know what computer your using. On default ASUS you need to press a key or click the mouse and then exactly 4 seconds later your typing like this. It won't wake up if you bump anything, I have been using sleep mode for years.


----------



## ahoslc

wingman99 said:


> You could test to see if the VRM is throttling. Place a house fan point to the VRM on the side with the open case PC.


Yup VRM throttle weird how easy it's throttling on just 1.3v


----------



## wingman99

ahoslc said:


> Yup VRM throttle weird how easy it's throttling on just 1.3v


Well some small iTX boards are known for that.


----------



## kevindd992002

I wasn't able to keep up with this thread for the past few weeks because of work. Any news on the audio ticking issue?


----------



## Scotty99

kevindd992002 said:


> I wasn't able to keep up with this thread for the past few weeks because of work. Any news on the audio ticking issue?


I havent had any problems since i disabled/enabled my video card from device manager (one time thing) and disabled fast boot.


----------



## ViTosS

CRJ84 said:


> Why is Asus not updating Intel Management Engine Driver and Intel Chipset driver?
> 
> On MSI's driver page ME driver is 11.7.0.1067 - 2018/05/17
> And Chipset driver 10.1.17541.8066 - 2018/05/16
> 
> MSI Godlike z370
> 
> Asus driver page
> 
> ME Version 11.7.0.1045 - 2017/12/26
> Chipset Version 10.1.1.45 - 2017/12/26
> 
> This is from Hero x z370
> 
> Is it safe to download the MSI versions?


I was wondering that, Asus Maximus X Hero still lists MEI and Chipset from 2017... I don't know if you upgrade to these from MSI you will have better performance/stability, if someone can answer that I would like to know too...

Btw adaptive voltage is still broken for me and I asked in ROG forum, Raja pratically responded to me saying ''just deal with that'', many people reporting the problem and he said ''it's working as intended'' when it is not and I tried all the solutions he proposed, the variation is there, can be minimized if you use AVX offset, but it still there and nothing compared to manual mode... Even the SVID Best-Case Scenario and AC/DC Loadline to 0.01 can't fix and have a solid voltage and precise like manual mode, I would like to run 5.2Ghz but it requires 1.40+v and I would like to use adaptive for CPU preservation, I don't think they will fix that and I'm forced to stick with manual and [email protected]


----------



## kevindd992002

Scotty99 said:


> I havent had any problems since i disabled/enabled my video card from device manager (one time thing) and disabled fast boot.


Ok, I'll have to keep that in mind then. Thanks.


----------



## ViTosS

I also fixed my audio popping issue just by disabling in BIOS and Windows the Fast Startup, never had it again


----------



## wingman99

ViTosS said:


> I was wondering that, Asus Maximus X Hero still lists MEI and Chipset from 2017... I don't know if you upgrade to these from MSI you will have better performance/stability, if someone can answer that I would like to know too...
> 
> Btw adaptive voltage is still broken for me and I asked in ROG forum, Raja pratically responded to me saying ''just deal with that'', many people reporting the problem and he said ''it's working as intended'' when it is not and I tried all the solutions he proposed, the variation is there, can be minimized if you use AVX offset, but it still there and nothing compared to manual mode... Even the SVID Best-Case Scenario and AC/DC Loadline to 0.01 can't fix and have a solid voltage and precise like manual mode, I would like to run 5.2Ghz but it requires 1.40+v and I would like to use adaptive for CPU preservation, I don't think they will fix that and I'm forced to stick with manual and [email protected]


I use Adaptive offset. What problem are you having?


----------



## ViTosS

wingman99 said:


> I use Adaptive offset. What problem are you having?


Example, if I set 50x/50x and 1.310v, voltage jumps to 1.344v just by opening Google Chrome tabs, while stress testing it goes from 1.265~1.328v, while using LLC 5, the problem happens in any LLC, if I set the same voltage to 1.310v but manual, I have a solid 1.312v and no matter what I open in Google Chrome, it only drops to 1.280v or 1.296v, never exceed, while stress testing with AVX it's a SOLID 1.280v, I know that must be just my OCD, but I don't like this with adaptive, the fluctuation, and if I don't set AC/DC Loadline to 0.01 and only SVID to Best Case, I have a voltage of 1.52v even setting in BIOS 1.310v, it's crazy bugged adaptive mode.


----------



## Jpmboy

ViTosS said:


> Example, if I set 50x/50x and 1.310v, voltage jumps to 1.344v just by opening Google Chrome tabs, while stress testing it goes from 1.265~1.328v, while using LLC 5, the problem happens in any LLC, if I set the same voltage to 1.310v but manual, I have a solid 1.312v and no matter what I open in Google Chrome, it only drops to 1.280v or 1.296v, never exceed, while stress testing with AVX it's a SOLID 1.280v, I know that must be just my OCD, but I don't like this with adaptive, the fluctuation, and if I don't set AC/DC Loadline to 0.01 and only SVID to Best Case, I have a voltage of 1.52v even setting in BIOS 1.310v, it's crazy bugged adaptive mode.


 Adaptive used the VId table (which is a voltage/freq/load table) so it's not surprising that GC jumps slightly (remember - cpuZ and every other OS tool can only report in 16mV increments/bins - the measured value will be more accurate).
It's not really a bug, it is Additional Turbo Voltage (on the VID). So, if at ant given freq, your CPU can run stable below the VID, you can use Manual override or adaptive + a neg offset. 

I find the response and performance to be better if Speedstep is disabled and Speed shift is enabled... C-states enabled up to at least C6. (trhe c6 link is necessary for shift to work properly) whether using adaptive or manual override.


----------



## wingman99

ViTosS said:


> Example, if I set 50x/50x and 1.310v, voltage jumps to 1.344v just by opening Google Chrome tabs, while stress testing it goes from 1.265~1.328v, while using LLC 5, the problem happens in any LLC, if I set the same voltage to 1.310v but manual, I have a solid 1.312v and no matter what I open in Google Chrome, it only drops to 1.280v or 1.296v, never exceed, while stress testing with AVX it's a SOLID 1.280v, I know that must be just my OCD, but I don't like this with adaptive, the fluctuation, and if I don't set AC/DC Loadline to 0.01 and only SVID to Best Case, I have a voltage of 1.52v even setting in BIOS 1.310v, it's crazy bugged adaptive mode.


That is normal for SVID/DVID to increase and decrease according to the VID table load. SVID/DVID was a new Intel design for the OEM PCs for power saving way back around sandy bridge year 2011. I have been using Adaptive/Dynaimc Vcore since 2011. All you need to do is set stable voltage in BIOS and don't worry about what you see in software movement. It is my OCD that I like to have the most efficient PC and BIOS settings using all the stock power saving features that the Intel engineers designed. So the only thing I changed in default BIOS for overclocking the processor is multiplier and IA AC loadline 0.01, IA DC loadline 0.01,then Adaptive offset, that is it.


----------



## ViTosS

Jpmboy said:


> Adaptive used the VId table (which is a voltage/freq/load table) so it's not surprising that GC jumps slightly (remember - cpuZ and every other OS tool can only report in 16mV increments/bins - the measured value will be more accurate).
> It's not really a bug, it is Additional Turbo Voltage (on the VID). So, if at ant given freq, your CPU can run stable below the VID, you can use Manual override or adaptive + a neg offset.
> 
> I find the response and performance to be better if Speedstep is disabled and Speed shift is enabled... C-states enabled up to at least C6. (trhe c6 link is necessary for shift to work properly) whether using adaptive or manual override.





wingman99 said:


> That is normal for SVID/DVID to increase and decrease according to the VID table load. SVID/DVID was a new Intel design for the OEM PCs for power saving way back around sandy bridge year 2011. I have been using Adaptive/Dynaimc Vcore since 2011. All you need to do is set stable voltage in BIOS and don't worry about what you see in software movement. It is my OCD that I like to have the most efficient PC and BIOS settings using all the stock power saving features that the Intel engineers designed. So the only thing I changed in default BIOS for overclocking the processor is multiplier and IA AC loadline 0.01, IA DC loadline 0.01,then Adaptive offset, that is it.


Well... you guys can call that normal, but I can notice a huge difference how the vcore is working when using adaptive, and it is even worse if I don't use AVX offset, I know about the 16mV increments, discovered that by just monitoring vcore in my OC attempts, I preferer the voltage more solid and precise from what I set in BIOS. But anyway, I'm fine using 5.0Ghz at 1.280v manual override, I just hope the CPU doesn't suffer degradation faster by using like that.


----------



## ViTosS

I also read I think in Jpmboy OC guide or another people saying it's good to have a lower load voltage than idle, like a vdroop of 0.03v, that is not possible for me using adaptive, I always have the huge voltage spikes when just web browsing, I can only have that when full stressing the CPU, which in manual mode I'm assured I have that.


----------



## wingman99

ViTosS said:


> I also read I think in Jpmboy OC guide or another people saying it's good to have a lower load voltage than idle, like a vdroop of 0.03v, that is not possible for me using adaptive, I always have the huge voltage spikes when just web browsing, I can only have that when full stressing the CPU, which in manual mode I'm assured I have that.


My Idle voltage is 0.896v.


----------



## Scotty99

wingman99 said:


> My Idle voltage is 0.896v.


Sure but the trade off is you get higher than needed voltage spikes when doing normal everyday stuff like loading a web browser. Adaptive really is trash on coffee lake, it does not function the same as it did on ivy haswell or even kaby lake. You can try and adjust the spikes out with offset and adaptive, but for many boards adaptive and offset do nothing as svid takes over completely, this is a change in intel spec from the previous generations. Whats funny is now asus has the worst form off variable voltage of any manufacturer, a plain offset overclock on a msi/asrock/giga board is going to function better than asus's adaptive on coffee lake.

There are still plenty of reasons to buy an asus motherboard but variable voltage overclocking is not one of them, i kept my strix cause its pretty and it has a nice m.2 heatsink. I also paid only 40 dollars for it after promo codes and amex points, so there is that lol.


----------



## wingman99

Scotty99 said:


> Sure but the trade off is you get higher than needed voltage spikes when doing normal everyday stuff like loading a web browser. Adaptive really is trash on coffee lake, it does not function the same as it did on ivy haswell or even kaby lake. You can try and adjust the spikes out with offset and adaptive, but for many boards adaptive and offset do nothing as svid takes over completely, this is a change in intel spec from the previous generations. Whats funny is now asus has the worst form off variable voltage of any manufacturer, a plain offset overclock on a msi/asrock/giga board is going to function better than asus's adaptive on coffee lake.
> 
> There are still plenty of reasons to buy an asus motherboard but variable voltage overclocking is not one of them, i kept my strix cause its pretty and it has a nice m.2 heatsink. I also paid only 40 dollars for it after promo codes and amex points, so there is that lol.


I have Gigabyte and ASUS Z370 and they are the same SVID/DVID operation just different readings with the same processor.
Realbench ASUS
Overclocking 5.0GHz LLC AUTO, IA AC loadline 0.01, IA DC loadline 0.01, Select Adaptive +0.250v = 1.296v to ~1.360v.

Realbench Gigabyte
Overclocking 5.0GHz LLC AUTO, DVID +0.060 = 1.236v to ~1.308v.


----------



## Scotty99

Load voltage isnt what we are talking about, that works fine on adaptive and can be adjusted out for with LLC. The problem again (this has been discussed in this thread before) is that randomly while doing nothing particularly intensive your load volts will shoot way above what you set for in the bios, this is not something that used to occur with adaptive on previous generations.

Ive long since waved goodbye to adaptive and went with manual, no matter what i did with offset+adaptive it would shoot my 4.8ghz oc to 1.344 when all i wanted (or needed) was 1.28. 

Just to be clear im not saying these spikes are dangerous or anything, it was just annoying that you couldnt limit your volts properly with adaptive and i did see higher gaming temps because of this.


----------



## wingman99

Scotty99 said:


> Load voltage isnt what we are talking about, that works fine on adaptive and can be adjusted out for with LLC. The problem again (this has been discussed in this thread before) is that randomly while doing nothing particularly intensive your load volts will shoot way above what you set for in the bios, this is not something that used to occur with adaptive on previous generations.
> 
> Ive long since waved goodbye to adaptive and went with manual, no matter what i did with offset+adaptive it would shoot my 4.8ghz oc to 1.344 when all i wanted (or needed) was 1.28.
> 
> Just to be clear im not saying these spikes are dangerous or anything, it was just annoying that you couldnt limit your volts properly with adaptive and i did see higher gaming temps because of this.


Yes the voltage shot up on previous generations above what you set in BIOS when web browsing. If you search my threads I was talking about it 1 and 2 generations ago when folks like you were complaining it did not happen on previous generation for them. Also I was showing that the web browser uses more volts like a stress load.

Here is my specifications of me talking about maximum voltage for i5 6600k Prime 95 avx needed 1.140v for stabity. DVID, LLC AUTO, Prime95 v28.10 Max 1.332v, RealBench Max 1.296v, Web browsing Max 1.344v idle ~ 1.032-0.132, idle power saving features off 1.332v 

My coffee lake does the same thing. These conversation are like deja vu LOL.


----------



## Scotty99

Pretty sure the reason people are complaining about this is because they had kaby or haswell systems and they dont understand why the spikes are occuring on coffee when they werent on kaby. I came from sandy so i cant be sure (adaptive was introduced with ivy), i just know ive seen more than a handful of people note that adaptive behavior is different on coffee than it was on kaby.

Someone even posted a quote from the rog forums with a mod telling them to just use manual volts, i dont think even asus knows whats going on.


----------



## wingman99

Scotty99 said:


> Pretty sure the reason people are complaining about this is because they had kaby or haswell systems and they dont understand why the spikes are occuring on coffee when they werent on kaby. I came from sandy so i cant be sure (adaptive was introduced with ivy), i just know ive seen more than a handful of people note that adaptive behavior is different on coffee than it was on kaby.
> 
> Someone even posted a quote from the rog forums with a mod telling them to just use manual volts, i dont think even asus knows whats going on.


What people think they remember is different from what is happening now. I keep overclocking records of previous voltages and settings of generations. Most folks did not use Adaptive/offset before coffee lake because there was no IA AC/DC Load line and the voltage was to high on the VID scale of a i7 and you would have to use excessive negative voltage causing stability problems at idle and below max turbo. The VID stack on a i5 is much lower and can be used on a Gigabyte with DVID now and in the past without IA AC/DC. I can't use SVID without IA AC/DC on ASUS the voltage is to high.

I also had sandy and was using DVID/SVID 4.5GHz DVID +0.984v= spike 1.344v. The scaling was better so you did not need IA AC/DC. and it spikes just like like all the rest of the generations. Take a look at any stock OEM PCs there all the same since sandy bridge.

Folks have been complaining about DVID/SVID since it was introduced, All these conversation are like deja vu LOL.:thumb:


----------



## Scotty99

I guess its a lesser of two evils thing, id personally rather have a voltage ceiling that i can control than low idle volts.

I would like to see others reply with haswell and kaby systems, from what i understand offset in tandem with adaptive could rid these spikes that occur under non stressful loads.


----------



## wingman99

Scotty99 said:


> I guess its a lesser of two evils thing, id personally rather have a voltage ceiling that i can control than low idle volts.
> 
> I would like to see others reply with haswell and kaby systems, from what i understand offset in tandem with adaptive could rid these spikes that occur under non stressful loads.


SVID/DVID, Adaptive, offset, dynamic, are the same functions of the stock Intel VID stack in the processor. They just have different names from the motherboard manufactures. The functions are all the same thing. They all just offset the Intel VID stack in the processor that calls the commands to the motherboard VRM where the voltages is offset by the motherboard VRM.

Example the processor sends VID (voltage identification digital) for 1.245v then the motherboard VRM offset +0.0123=1.368v.


----------



## Scotty99

wingman99 said:


> SVID/DVID, Adaptive, offset, dynamic, are the same functions of the stock Intel VID stack in the processor. They just have different names from the motherboard manufactures. The functions are all the same thing. They all just offset the Intel VID stack in the processor that calls the commands to the motherboard VRM where the voltages is offset by the motherboard VRM.
> 
> Example the processor sends VID (voltage identification digital) for 1.245v then the motherboard VRM offset +0.0123=1.368v.


Im talking about using adaptive vs manual voltages, of course.

BTW here is a quote from the kaby lake overclocking guide stating that indeed you can lower the svid of a CPU by using a negative offset with adaptive:
"The major caveat of Adaptive Mode is that the minimum possible voltage for a given ratio is pre-programmed into the CPU. If you happen to have a very good CPU that can run at a lower voltage than the minimum adaptive voltage for a given ratio, there are only two ways to lower the value. The first method is to apply an offset. That’s why there is the option to apply an offset when in Adaptive mode."

These same options are of course available in coffee lake bios, but they dont actually function like that.


----------



## Scotty99

Maybe your board isnt like this wingman, but let me explain whats happening on boards that are affected. You can set literally any number in the offset field and windows will load in at the exact same value. Adjusting LLC is the only way to fine tune your overclock with adaptive mode engaged.

The reason vitos and myself are not a fan of this is because during gaming if my CPU only needs 1.28v (example) to be stable in a stress test, why is it spiking to 1.344 (again, example) when im playing a game? You cannot adjust out the spikes here, you need to set a manual voltage to do so. These spikes are also not just annoyances, adaptive overclocking will and does increase CPU temp while performing non stressful tasks such as gaming or just normal computing workloads.

The TLDR for this entire conversation is if you have an asus board its best to just use manual voltages, if you are not cool with the always high idle voltages that manual overclocking demands its best to buy a different brand of motherboard.


----------



## feznz

I can confirm running 1.42v @ 5.4Ghz, spikes to 1.44v will degrade a chip slightly over time (5months) ended up backing right down to 1.36v @ 5.2Ghz 

which is still pretty respectable


----------



## Jpmboy

ViTosS said:


> I also read I think in Jpmboy OC guide or another people saying it's good to have a lower load voltage than idle, like a vdroop of 0.03v, that is not possible for me using adaptive, I always have the huge voltage spikes when just web browsing, I can only have that when full stressing the CPU, which in manual mode I'm assured I have that.


There's zero difference in "lifetime" by using Manual override. Voltage at idle is pretty meaningless (within reason of course) it is current that matters. So, manual is completely fine. Just enable C-states and you're good to go. My 4960X is on and working 24/7/365 and has been set at 1.375V manual override for several years now. 





Scotty99 said:


> Pretty sure the reason people are complaining about this is because they had kaby or haswell systems and they dont understand why the spikes are occuring on coffee when they werent on kaby. *I came from sandy so i cant be sure (adaptive was introduced with ivy)*, i just know ive seen more than a handful of people note that adaptive behavior is different on coffee than it was on kaby.
> 
> Someone even posted a quote from the rog forums with a mod telling them to just use manual volts, i dont think even asus knows whats going on.


It has to do with the VID and how it is now managed by INtel. (most likely it was Praz or Raja on the ROG forum). Manual override is absolutely fine.
Clearly Intel's engineers had become a bit complacent in recent years... this vid thing, prefetch "holes", pigeon-poop instead of solder. Hence, the "raise" of AMD out of the ashes. 


Actually - my ASrock z67 E3Gen3 allowed for adaptive voltage with the 2700K that's in there. Was buried in the bios, worked just fine. That rig now encodes sec cam videos from the house/barn etc cameras all day, so I set it to 1.475V manual override in the past year or so. No problems, and the only time that little 4 core gets a rest is if there is a power failure! damn thing is bullet proof. :clock:



feznz said:


> I can confirm running 1.42v @ 5.4Ghz, spikes to 1.44v will degrade a chip slightly over time (5months) ended up backing right down to 1.36v @ 5.2Ghz
> 
> which is still pretty respectable


Yeah - it seems that there been some measurements showing large load-transition spikes (micro second kind - not the VID-based spikes discussed above) with vcores in the mid 1.3V range. So far, I have my 8700K at 1,35V for 5.2/5.0 cache tho It is not used constantly.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya manual is fine, i just personally dont like the idea of having volts higher at idle than they are at load lol (i know this is 100% fine, it just seems backasswards). But alas it is the lesser of two evils with asus boards for coffee. Great board otherwise, more companies need to do proper m.2 heatsinks like this strix has, the msi carbon actually increases ssd temps.


----------



## Scotty99

feznz said:


> I can confirm running 1.42v @ 5.4Ghz, spikes to 1.44v will degrade a chip slightly over time (5months) ended up backing right down to 1.36v @ 5.2Ghz
> 
> which is still pretty respectable


I need more for 5.0 than you do for 5.2 lol.

Not that i need more cores, but i wonder if the rumored 8 core mainstream chips will slot into some z370 boards, would give me a reason to dump this dud 8700k.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> Ya manual is fine, i just personally dont like the idea of having volts higher at idle than they are at load lol (i know this is 100% fine, it just seems backasswards). But alas it is the lesser of two evils with asus boards for coffee. Great board otherwise, more companies need to do proper m.2 heatsinks like this strix has, the msi carbon actually increases ssd temps.


yeah - looks odd but the droop at load is a good thing, compensates for transition spikes that occur on any voltage-clamped circuit when the current flow changes (load = current flow).


----------



## Praz

ViTosS said:


> Raja pratically responded to me saying ''just deal with that''


Hello

And the link pointing to where that was either stated or implied is what?


----------



## ViTosS

Praz said:


> Hello
> 
> And the link pointing to where that was either stated or implied is what?


He didn't say these words, but pratically showed no solution and said: ''Well, given how small the difference is, why worry about it? You'll need to change the settings and loadline calibration to approximate the value that will put your mind at rest. I don't think you should bother, though, because you'd need to have severe OCD to be worried about 10mV...''

It's not just 10mV btw, it is way more than that when web browsing, thread link is: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...ng-to-fix-Adaptive-Mode-OC-for-Maximus-X-Hero

And the minimal variation was found testing 45x/45x, when I increase the multiplier, it seems to get worse, he said I would need to tune AC/DC Loadline and LLC, but I have no idea what to put in AC/DC instead of 0.01, but LLC I tried from 3 to 6 all have the same problem, just higher or less vdroop, but the spikes and fluctuations still present.


----------



## Scotty99

Actually wingman i was the one who brought this offset+adaptive bug to asus's attention, they readily admit it was a change in spec from last gen:
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?96800-Maximus-X-series-amp-Strix-Z370-UEFI-updates

There are also multiple threads on that forum where people report differing behavior from last gen.

Anyways will be my last post directed towards you wingman, i gave you the benefit of the doubt for a while but now im sure.


----------



## wingman99

Scotty99 said:


> Actually wingman i was the one who brought this offset+adaptive bug to asus's attention, they readily admit it was a change in spec from last gen:
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?96800-Maximus-X-series-amp-Strix-Z370-UEFI-updates
> 
> There are also multiple threads on that forum where people report differing behavior from last gen.
> 
> Anyways will be my last post directed towards you wingman, i gave you the benefit of the doubt for a while but now im sure.


That was suspect intel tech change in negative offset.


> Test builds for applying negative offset to adaptive voltage (issue was due to negative offset also needing to be set for the ring domain - some Intel rule changes over previous gen, I suspect):


like I said before folks were not using Adaptive in last generation because the voltage was to high and negative offset would not cut it on a i7. I have not seen anyone in this forum that was using SVID on i7 kaby lake to compare besides me on my i5 and it runs cool with low volts using DVID.


----------



## Praz

ViTosS said:


> He didn't say these words, but pratically showed no solution and said: ''Well, given how small the difference is, why worry about it? You'll need to change the settings and loadline calibration to approximate the value that will put your mind at rest. I don't think you should bother, though, because you'd need to have severe OCD to be worried about 10mV...''
> 
> It's not just 10mV btw, it is way more than that when web browsing, thread link is: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...ng-to-fix-Adaptive-Mode-OC-for-Maximus-X-Hero


Hello

Seems your post Raja was replying to in the thread you linked you stated observing a 0.016V spread between minimum and maximum voltages. When his post is not taken out of context his reply makes perfect sense.


----------



## feznz

I use adaptive with these setting LLC level 5 
In windows I get 1.365v VID no big overshoot back to bios 1101


----------



## wingman99

feznz said:


> I use adaptive with these setting LLC level 5
> In windows I get 1.365v VID no big overshoot back to bios 1101


I don't get what your saying.


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> I use adaptive with these setting LLC level 5
> In windows I get 1.365v VID no big overshoot back to bios 1101


why any offset? VID in windows? What in the vcore voltage with those settings?


----------



## encrypted11

When I had the X Hero, L6 was required on BIOSes 0213-0808 for keeping voltages within range of the manual override you'd set in the BIOS.

The first time adaptive started working on ASUS Z370 (around 0505?) I've noticed the vcore was a fair bit higher or lower on L6 over manual.
Overall I was able to get workable c states + adaptive/offset through the past few platforms at some point when the BIOSes are mature.

But with the SVID influence on adaptive/offsets, it'll always be slightly different from your stable manual profiles and a 1:1 profile port over is unlikely. 
Targeting vcore on load and deciding between tight LLC + lower core voltage (BIOS) or a loose LLC and higher core voltage for potential alleviating idle time instability comes to mind. You're almost never going to get a perfectly flat peak vcore under load relative to manual vcore regardless of the board manufacturer.


----------



## feznz

wingman99 said:


> I don't get what your saying.





Jpmboy said:


> why any offset? VID in windows? What in the vcore voltage with those settings?



I have no idea why I use an offset but for some reason in Der8auer 5Ghz pre-set profile that is what it is set at 
Basically used that as a base and just changed the core clocks and vccio and vccsa and set the ram manually it works :thumb:


----------



## wingman99

feznz said:


> I have no idea why I use an offset but for some reason in Der8auer 5Ghz pre-set profile that is what it is set at
> Basically used that as a base and just changed the core clocks and vccio and vccsa and set the ram manually it works :thumb:


That is great. Where did you get Der8auer 5Ghz pre-set profile?


----------



## feznz

wingman99 said:


> That is great. Where did you get Der8auer 5Ghz pre-set profile?




Top of the extreme tweakers menu

I do have a pretty good chip though https://valid.x86.fr/ualk77


----------



## schoolofmonkey

feznz said:


> Top of the extreme tweakers menu
> 
> I do have a pretty good chip though https://valid.x86.fr/ualk77


My chip hates that profile, won't even post.
But I need 1.4v for 5Ghz


----------



## feznz

schoolofmonkey said:


> My chip hates that profile, won't even post.
> But I need 1.4v for 5Ghz



My chip I think has a weak IMC not too sure it could be me sucking at memory OCing



The Der8auer profile is a good start for those obsure settings but if it takes 1.4 it is what it is


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> I have no idea why I use an offset but for some reason in Der8auer 5Ghz pre-set profile that is what it is set at
> Basically used that as a base and just changed the core clocks and vccio and vccsa and set the ram manually it works :thumb:


I thought it might be from that. You really do not need the offset on anything but Auto when using Adaptive with the more recent bios(es). It's kinda a habit... like me still setting IA AC and DC load lines to 0.01 with the most recent bios (not needed, but no conflict).


----------



## wingman99

feznz said:


> Top of the extreme tweakers menu
> 
> I do have a pretty good chip though https://valid.x86.fr/ualk77


Sweet 5600 MHz.:thumb:


----------



## wingman99

Jpmboy said:


> I thought it might be from that. You really do not need the offset on anything but Auto when using Adaptive with the more recent bios(es). It's kinda a habit... like me still setting IA AC and DC load lines to 0.01 with the most recent bios (not needed, but no conflict).


If I don't use IA AC and DC load lines to 0.01 at 5.0GHz with the most resent BIOS I have to use to much negative offset otherwise my Vcore will be at 1.480v with the stock Adaptive processor VID table presets.


----------



## feznz

Jpmboy said:


> I thought it might be from that. You really do not need the offset on anything but Auto when using Adaptive with the more recent bios(es). It's kinda a habit... like me still setting IA AC and DC load lines to 0.01 with the most recent bios (not needed, but no conflict).



Kinda one of those it aint broke so why fix it and habits

Just I don't see those high voltage overshoots or high idle voltage problems that people are talking about.


----------



## wingman99

feznz said:


> Kinda one of those it aint broke so why fix it and habits
> 
> Just I don't see those high voltage overshoots or high idle voltage problems that people are talking about.


I don't see them either.


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> Kinda one of those* it aint broke so why fix it and habits*
> 
> Just I don't see those high voltage overshoots or high idle voltage problems that people are talking about.


A daaum good habit!


----------



## ssateneth

Is there a memtweakit for Z370? I run asus memtweakit but I only get the "about" screen and see no timings.


----------



## bl4ckdot

ssateneth said:


> Is there a memtweakit for Z370? I run asus memtweakit but I only get the "about" screen and see no timings.



I don't tink so. I had the same issue.


----------



## evensen007

Greetings all! Good to see a lot of you in here that I remember from the 8700k thread in HardWare news. I ultimately decided to go with the Maximus X Code since I got it open box from Newegg for 200 bucks! I was a bit skeptical, but it came in good condition and I installed it last night with no issues. It appears to be a really great board! I love all the heatsink features over the VRM's and m.2 drive. To go along with the board, I got 2x8GB of Cas15 3000 Ram, an 8700k, and a Samsung 970 Evo 1TB. This thing screams! I was a bit sad to pull out my old Sandy bridge that has been with me since 2011. It's amazing that it was still kicking at 4.5GHZ for that many years. There really wasn't anything it couldn't do since my 1080ti takes over at 3440x1440 resolution, but I just got the itch. 

Like most people probably did, I started with Der8auers quick start video and set it to 5.0ghz, 3 AVX offset, 1.36volts etc. I haven't delidded yet, but am on custom water-cooling. It passed just fine with a max of 70c. I believe de-lidding will help even more. I dropped the voltage down to 1.34 and it's also stable at 5Ghz there as well. 

Just wondering what you all would do next. Should I find the upper limits of the cpu (5.1/5.2/5.3), find the bottom limit of voltage at 5GHZ, start playing with adaptive voltage?

Thanks!


----------



## bl4ckdot

evensen007 said:


> Greetings all! Good to see a lot of you in here that I remember from the 8700k thread in HardWare news. I ultimately decided to go with the Maximus X Code since I got it open box from Newegg for 200 bucks! I was a bit skeptical, but it came in good condition and I installed it last night with no issues. It appears to be a really great board! I love all the heatsink features over the VRM's and m.2 drive. To go along with the board, I got 2x8GB of Cas15 3000 Ram, an 8700k, and a Samsung 970 Evo 1TB. This thing screams! I was a bit sad to pull out my old Sandy bridge that has been with me since 2011. It's amazing that it was still kicking at 4.5GHZ for that many years. There really wasn't anything it couldn't do since my 1080ti takes over at 3440x1440 resolution, but I just got the itch.
> 
> Like most people probably did, I started with Der8auers quick start video and set it to 5.0ghz, 3 AVX offset, 1.36volts etc. I haven't delidded yet, but am on custom water-cooling. It passed just fine with a max of 70c. I believe de-lidding will help even more. I dropped the voltage down to 1.34 and it's also stable at 5Ghz there as well.
> 
> Just wondering what you all would do next. Should I find the upper limits of the cpu (5.1/5.2/5.3), find the bottom limit of voltage at 5GHZ, start playing with adaptive voltage?
> 
> Thanks!



der8auer' video was a great start. You can follow up with *Jpmboy* guide (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I_1Zhs3rT8K8bEtoY-9pS1P4Bvin9nZZ/view)


----------



## KedarWolf

ssateneth said:


> Is there a memtweakit for Z370? I run asus memtweakit but I only get the "about" screen and see no timings.


Timing Configurator Works.

https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/X299 OC Formula/index.asp#Download


----------



## Praz

KedarWolf said:


> Timing Configurator Works.
> 
> https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/X299 OC Formula/index.asp#Download



Hello

As does Mem TweakIt.


----------



## Scotty99

So i finally decided to update to 0616 to try out the "improved overclocking". What they mean by that i have no idea but i tried the 5.0ghz preset and its just lol, it spikes volts up to 1.456 and of course power throttles the second you put a real load on your CPU because the preset didnt adjust power limits. Of course i never use these profiles just wanted to try to figure out what exactly they mean with the 0616 bios notes, it sure as hell isnt the presets.

Asus bios team is basically on vacation for z370.


----------



## gammagoat

Scotty99 said:


> Asus bios team is basically on vacation for z370.


Fact!


----------



## wingman99

Scotty99 said:


> So i finally decided to update to 0616 to try out the "improved overclocking". What they mean by that i have no idea but i tried the 5.0ghz preset and its just lol, it spikes volts up to 1.456 and of course power throttles the second you put a real load on your CPU because the preset didnt adjust power limits. Of course i never use these profiles just wanted to try to figure out what exactly they mean with the 0616 bios notes, it sure as hell isnt the presets.
> 
> Asus bios team is basically on vacation for z370.


Try the 5.0GHz preset with XMP and that should prevent throttling.


----------



## Luminair

Maximus X Hero random crashes at idle but not under load. I assume the cause is too low voltage during deep C-states. My first guess is that the fix will be to lower the LLC and increase the voltage offset. 

To troubleshoot this I want to disable individual C states like C3 and C6. But the BIOS has only one master switch for ALL C states. Is there a place in the bios to tweak individual C states that I'm missing? Is there a windows tool for this?


----------



## wingman99

Luminair said:


> Maximus X Hero random crashes at idle but not under load. I assume the cause is too low voltage during deep C-states. My first guess is that the fix will be to lower the LLC and increase the voltage offset.
> 
> To troubleshoot this I want to disable individual C states like C3 and C6. But the BIOS has only one master switch for ALL C states. Is there a place in the bios to tweak individual C states that I'm missing? Is there a windows tool for this?


Well to hep diagnose it would not be C-states if your using positive offset. The C-state idle Vcore runs at OEM stock with Adaptive turbo setting and above stock with + offset.

When your system is at idle the are processes boosting in the background full utilization.


----------



## Jpmboy

Luminair said:


> Maximus X Hero random crashes at idle but not under load. I assume the cause is too low voltage during deep C-states. My first guess is that the fix will be to lower the LLC and increase the voltage offset.
> 
> To troubleshoot this I want to disable individual C states like C3 and C6. But the BIOS has only one master switch for ALL C states. Is there a place in the bios to tweak individual C states that I'm missing? Is there a windows tool for this?


 if you are using win 10, and have speedshift enabled, leave all states up to c6 enabled or "Auto". Otherwise it really can't work properly.
for the testing you want to do, disable spedshifty, enable speedstep and disable all c-states. If it still crashes at idle (any bsod code??) switch to manual vcore, with all c-states enabled. If it still crashes the CPU may need to be replaced... IMO.


----------



## Luminair

Good news! The Maximus X Hero lets you tweak each C state by setting C states to ON instead of AUTO, which paradoxically then lets you disable them one by one.

I also want to find and test the VCORE voltage response setting.



wingman99 said:


> The C-state idle Vcore runs at OEM stock with Adaptive turbo setting and above stock with + offset.


Right but it could be crashing because it's going from zero to 5.1ghz instantly with insufficient voltage somewhere along the way.



Jpmboy said:


> If it still crashes the CPU may need to be replaced... IMO.


In this case the CPU can do any stress test 24/7, including prime95 AVX. So the CPU seems fine, the system just crashes when doing nothing. It would seem to be a voltage problem at lower clocks because I googled reports of people having idle crashes that they fixed by disabling C states. So I'll test the C states off and if that stops the crashing then I'll know I failed to give it enough voltage at the lower end somehow.


----------



## wingman99

Luminair said:


> Good news! The Maximus X Hero lets you tweak each C state by setting C states to ON instead of AUTO, which paradoxically then lets you disable them one by one.
> 
> I also want to find and test the VCORE voltage response setting.
> 
> 
> 
> Right but it could be crashing because it's going from zero to 5.1ghz instantly with insufficient voltage somewhere along the way.


True stock turbo is 4.7GHz and 5.1GHz is 400Mhz over stock that your VRM possibly can't keep up past 4.7GHz. I have been using DVID/SVID and C-States, speed step with overclocking since 2011 and speed shift since kaby lake without a problem. Good to know you can disable C states one by one on ASUS. I just switched two weeks ago to ASUS from Gigabyte to just to see if ASUS Z370 is better. I would like to see how your testing results goes.


----------



## Jpmboy

Luminair said:


> Good news! The Maximus X Hero lets you tweak each C state by setting C states to ON instead of AUTO, which paradoxically then lets you disable them one by one.
> 
> I also want to find and test the VCORE voltage response setting.
> Right but it could be crashing because it's going from zero to 5.1ghz instantly with insufficient voltage somewhere along the way.
> 
> 
> 
> In this case the CPU can do any stress test 24/7, including prime95 AVX. So the CPU seems fine, the system just crashes when doing nothing. It would seem to be a voltage problem at lower clocks because I googled reports of people having idle crashes that they fixed by disabling C states. So I'll test the C states off and that stops the crashing then I'll know I failed to give it enough voltage at the lower end somehow.


the low end of the vid stack may be off, so switching to manual override vcore would address that potential issue. Warranty will cover performance issues in any p-state or t-state, so failure to idle is covered. Passing stress tests has nothing to do with the range of p-states. BAsically, if you have to use an offset to raise the vcore to stabilize idle frequencies, the cpu is having issues. lowering LLC (I think you mean decreasing vdroop) affects vcore at load, not vcore during transitions. :thumb:
If the cpu is delidded ... try manual override vcore with speedstep enabled, speedshift disabled.


----------



## KedarWolf

*Best way to lower RTLs.*

Setting DRAM Write Latency and CHA IO_Latency_offset will lower RTLs etc successfully. You want to go as low as you can with CHA IO_Latency_offset and still be GSAT and MemTest stable. I find on my 8700k depending on my RAM speed between 14-16 usually is best. at 4200 I run it at 15 stable. I run 4200MHZ rather than 4400 as I get really great timings at that speed and can have the cache at 5.1GHZ instead of 4.6GHZ with really improves my AIDA64 memory and cache test speeds.




























*Edit: This is with CHA IO_Latency_offset on Auto.*


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> Adaptive used the VId table (which is a voltage/freq/load table) so it's not surprising that GC jumps slightly (remember - cpuZ and every other OS tool can only report in 16mV increments/bins - the measured value will be more accurate).
> It's not really a bug, it is Additional Turbo Voltage (on the VID). So, if at ant given freq, your CPU can run stable below the VID, you can use Manual override or adaptive + a neg offset.
> 
> I find the response and performance to be better if Speedstep is disabled and Speed shift is enabled... C-states enabled up to at least C6. (trhe c6 link is necessary for shift to work properly) whether using adaptive or manual override.


 @Jpmboy is negative offset working properly in the newest BIOS or you still need to use one of the modded ones?


----------



## Moutsatsos

Hello everybody,I want to buy a Z370 mobo and i m thinking to go for maximus X hero.
I just sold my Crosshair Hero VI and I am wondering how does fans and sensors report (specially voltage readings of cpu) behave on MXH.
Read somewhere that fans ramp up also in MXH.
Read somewhere some RAM does't work at rated speed.
Are the above fixed?
Any other issues that might worth mentioning from your experience?


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> @*Jpmboy* is negative offset working properly in the newest BIOS or you still need to use one of the modded ones?



I have not looked at that recently. But as posted a long time ago, at least on the Apex early bioses, negative offset + adaptive was applying the proper voltage.


oh.. .and regarding RTL offsets, if you look at the how the numbers work, changing the rtl offset by 6 (21 to 15) adjusts the rtl by the difference. In other words, the RTL value is changed, but the "used" value is not. so offset 21 ang 69 is the same as offset 15 and 63. these values are set by the read-back time (based on CAS). RTL and iol set the IMC scheduling. you can tightening these by changing the RTL value, rather than the offset. stability will get more sensitive to drift depending on the margins one begins with.


----------



## VadimM

Hello! Is there any reason to move from pre-meltdown/spectre bios to the newest one? PRIME Z370-A 0430 bios.
I have i-8350k [email protected] Prime95 26.6 stable (non-AVX) and think about if I need to try something new)


----------



## evensen007

bl4ckdot said:


> der8auer' video was a great start. You can follow up with *Jpmboy* guide (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I_1Zhs3rT8K8bEtoY-9pS1P4Bvin9nZZ/view)


Thank you; followed this guide and have a good baseline. Stable at 5.0 @1.34 with adaptive dropping down to 1.23 @3.7GHZ. Temps max at 70c during Realbench stress tests, but I just got my delid kit so that should hopefully help.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> I have not looked at that recently. But as posted a long time ago, at least on the Apex early bioses, negative offset + adaptive was applying the proper voltage.
> 
> 
> oh.. .and regarding RTL offsets, if you look at the how the numbers work, changing the rtl offset by 6 (21 to 15) adjusts the rtl by the difference. In other words, the RTL value is changed, but the "used" value is not. so offset 21 ang 69 is the same as offset 15 and 63. these values are set by the read-back time (based on CAS). RTL and iol set the IMC scheduling. you can tightening these by changing the RTL value, rather than the offset. stability will get more sensitive to drift depending on the margins one begins with.


Are you saying the RTLs are not actually 63 when I do it this way?

Edit: I ask, because if I manually change the RTLs like others try, PC won't boot.


----------



## swddeluxx

Hi * Kedar * 

Can you show a .txt file (CTRL + F2 in Bios) of your current 8700k BIOS settings Kedar?


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> Are you saying the RTLs are not actually 63 when I do it this way?
> 
> Edit: I ask, because if I manually change the RTLs like others try, PC won't boot.


 Yes that's correct, sorry bud. The offset is applied to the RTL shown/entered in bios (essentially substracted from) to give the RTL _applied_. Lowering the _applied _RTL can cost significant voltage. RTL is set by the read-back time... which is related to trace length etc. That said, getting a configuration where rtls and iols hold constant across the channels and sticks over time is key! :thumb:


*Here's an oldie but goodie from ram guru Raja*.
and a more recent snip of a post he made in response to RTL tweaking:

_" .... It will have to be high because RTL and IO/L set the IMC schedule. IO/L will vary by DIMM and probably works at the sub DDR clock level. The platform sets these values up by measuring readback time - there are physical constraints such as trace length. If one wishes to run the system tighter than default the only way to do so is to increase voltages so that there is sufficient slew rate and IO drive to ensure reasonable timing sync. The amount of overhead depends on how much margin the buffer stack has - it will eat into that margin. Hence, this type of tweaking is really only for benchmarking - on 24.7 systems taking things tighter than what is sensed by the automated setup routines is likely to result in (more) conditional stability.

There was an old Anandtech article that covered this back in the day when it mattered more because there could be drift in the values at times - I wrote that piece to help people dial that out and experiment:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2869/...e-and-evga-at-the-oc-corral-page-6-updated-/6

At the time, tWCL was auto set on most boards so moving CAS around was sufficient. I think that things have improved a great deal since then - don't find much gain in locking those values down, plus one can disable RTL training now to prevent it anyway (Intel do listen and evolve)."_


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> Hi * Kedar *
> 
> Can you show a .txt file (CTRL + F2 in Bios) of your current 8700k BIOS settings Kedar?


Had to upload it to my Google Drive.

Adding attachments here not working in both .txt and .zip. 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1UW26JYMU7biDHUsMycz8e0o3nrpli0Ea


----------



## swddeluxx

Thank you very much, my friend


----------



## evensen007

Does anyone know of a place I can get parts for the new motherboards? Mine was missing the retention screw for the m.2 as well as the large metal heatsink plates that covers the m.2. I didn't realize until after I put everything together and I'd really REALLY rather not have to take everything apart and send it back. I contacted Asus support and they didn't help much. Sent me an email with a list of 50 retailers of Asus products (not sure how that will help). Any tips?


----------



## SirWaWa

Will there be any 24/7 stability issues running x4 dimm? I'm planning on getting 32gb of ram and 16gbx2 is sold out and actually the 8gbx4 is cheaper. It's gonna be the g.skill 3200 kit. I do plan on using the XMP profile.
Also is it still true that more populated dimm slots causes stress on the memory controller? I know this was a problem with older motherboard designs (X58).


----------



## wingman99

SirWaWa said:


> Will there be any 24/7 stability issues running x4 dimm? I'm planning on getting 32gb of ram and 16gbx2 is sold out and actually the 8gbx4 is cheaper. It's gonna be the g.skill 3200 kit. I do plan on using the XMP profile.
> Also is it still true that more populated dimm slots causes stress on the memory controller? I know this was a problem with older motherboard designs (X58).


It is still true that more populated dimm slots is more stress on the platform. However, Intel made T-Topology part of the Intel specification for the Z370, so you should not have a problem with 4 sticks running XMP 3200 speed.

Quote From ASUS
Make your memory go faster
ASUS OptiMem preserves memory signal integrity by routing memory traces and vias to the optimal PCB layer, and our T-Topology layout ensures time-aligned signaling by balancing trace lengths between memory slots. These enhancements lead to more headroom for overclocking and improved stability, allowing memory speeds of DDR4-4000 and beyond with all slots populated.

Improved stability and overclocking
with all slots populated
DDR4 – 4000MHz
CPU : Intel LGA 1151 i7-8700K | Motherboard : Prime Z370-A | DRAM : G.Skill F4-4000C18Q-32GTZ*4 | Power : Corsair AX1500i | Water-cooling : Corsair H115i | OS: Windows 10
https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/PRIME-Z370-A/

[email protected]
Conventional layouts are daisy chained, which means the signal line traces are chained between the slots on a channel. T-Branch creates a junction placed centrally between the two slots with an equal trace length to both.


----------



## KedarWolf

SirWaWa said:


> Will there be any 24/7 stability issues running x4 dimm? I'm planning on getting 32gb of ram and 16gbx2 is sold out and actually the 8gbx4 is cheaper. It's gonna be the g.skill 3200 kit. I do plan on using the XMP profile.
> Also is it still true that more populated dimm slots causes stress on the memory controller? I know this was a problem with older motherboard designs (X58).


I run my CL14 G.Skill DDR4 3200 at 4200MHZ 24/7, 4x8GB with decent timings.


----------



## Jpmboy

SirWaWa said:


> Will there be any 24/7 stability issues running x4 dimm? I'm planning on getting 32gb of ram and 16gbx2 is sold out and actually the 8gbx4 is cheaper. It's gonna be the g.skill 3200 kit. I do plan on using the XMP profile.
> Also is it still true that more populated dimm slots causes stress on the memory controller? I know this was a problem with older motherboard designs (X58).


4x8GB is not a problem for this architecture or the coffee-lake IMC. 4x8GB may OC better than 2x16GB anyway simply due to SS vs DS. :thumb:


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> 4x8GB is not a problem for this architecture or the coffee-lake IMC. 4x8GB may OC better than 2x16GB anyway simply due to SS vs DS. :thumb:



*G.Skill just took extreme RAM to the next level with a DDR4-5066 memory kit*

https://www.pcgamer.com/gskill-just...m_source=facebook&utm_campaign=buffer-maxpcfb

Apparently not an overclocked kit, but a new SKU.


----------



## KedarWolf

https://game.intel.com/8086sweepstakes/

Win best Coffee Lake CPU!! 5GHZ, out of the box. 8086k.


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> https://game.intel.com/8086sweepstakes/
> 
> Win best Coffee Lake CPU!! 5GHZ, out of the box. 8086k.



thanks for the heads up buddy! :wheee:


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> thanks for the heads up buddy! :wheee:


 @Jpmboy I'm buying an 8086k CPU. ordering it from www.newegg.ca later today. It has to be quite good though to beat my existing 8700k which does 5.1GHZ CPU, 5.1 cache, 4x8GB 3200 CL14 at 4200 with decent timings. 

Likely to be better though, but if not, I can sell it I'm sure.


----------



## Rowethren

I could be wrong but I think the 5Ghz stock is only on 1 core.


----------



## KedarWolf

Rowethren said:


> I could be wrong but I think the 5Ghz stock is only on 1 core.


It boosts one core to 5GHZ in default BIOS settings but you can lock the cores and have them all boost as high.


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> It boosts one core to 5GHZ in default BIOS settings but you can lock the cores and have them all boost as high.



That's called overclocking and it will be a lottery as usual. These are just 8700 binned by Intel. Probably better off buying an 8700k from Silicon Lottery. They bin by all-cores, not just one, and are delidded.


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> That's called overclocking and it will be a lottery as usual. These are just 8700 binned by Intel. Probably better off buying an 8700k from Silicon Lottery. They bin by all-cores, not just one, and are delidded.


Yes, I know they are binned 8700ks. Here's hoping though. 

Edit: I have everything I need to properly delid it.

BTW, peeps delidding CPUs, DON'T glue the IHS back on with Krazy Glue or anything like that. You can't get it off the CPU if you delid it again, even with nail polish remover etc. It's on there forever. 

What you use is Black Silicone Adhesive Sealant, basically same thing Intel uses. You need to fix the Conductonaut or reseat the heatsink, it comes off same as the Intel stuff. :h34r-smi

I bought this, worked perfectly. 

https://www.amazon.com/Permatex-81158-Silicone-Adhesive-Sealant/product-reviews/B000AL6WLA


----------



## wingman99

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, I know they are binned 8700ks. Here's hoping though.
> 
> Edit: I have everything I need to properly delid it.
> 
> BTW, peeps delidding CPUs, DON'T glue the IHS back on with Krazy Glue or anything like that. You can't get it off the CPU if you delid it again, even with nail polish remover etc. It's on there forever.
> 
> What you use is Black Silicone Adhesive Sealant, basically same thing Intel uses. You need to fix the Conductonaut or reseat the heatsink, it comes off same as the Intel stuff. :h34r-smi
> 
> I bought this, worked perfectly.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Permatex-81158-Silicone-Adhesive-Sealant/product-reviews/B000AL6WLA


Post back if you are able or not able to clock to 5.3 GHz with the 8086k.:h34r-smi


----------



## schoolofmonkey

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, I know they are binned 8700ks. Here's hoping though.
> 
> Edit: I have everything I need to properly delid it.
> 
> BTW, peeps delidding CPUs, DON'T glue the IHS back on with Krazy Glue or anything like that. You can't get it off the CPU if you delid it again, even with nail polish remover etc. It's on there forever.
> 
> What you use is Black Silicone Adhesive Sealant, basically same thing Intel uses. You need to fix the Conductonaut or reseat the heatsink, it comes off same as the Intel stuff. :h34r-smi
> 
> I bought this, worked perfectly.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Permatex-81158-Silicone-Adhesive-Sealant/product-reviews/B000AL6WLA


I went with this:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Black-RTV-...743695&hash=item1ec65c4048:g:loMAAOSwlndZBqIk

Tested it on my 7700k first, seems fine, gave it a 24 hour cure time.
It hold well, but not to where you can't get the IHS off again..

I just used the 4 corner method in case I did need to remove it again.

Looking to seal the 8700k now, but I've been too lazy to take it out of the system seeing that the IHS is just held on but the mounting bracket


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, I know they are binned 8700ks. Here's hoping though.
> 
> Edit: I have everything I need to properly delid it.
> 
> *BTW, peeps delidding CPUs, DON'T glue the IHS back on with Krazy Glue or anything like that. You can't get it off the CPU if you delid it again, even with nail polish remover etc. It's on there forever. *
> 
> What you use is Black Silicone Adhesive Sealant, basically same thing Intel uses. You need to fix the Conductonaut or reseat the heatsink, it comes off same as the Intel stuff. :h34r-smi
> 
> I bought this, worked perfectly.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Permatex-81158-Silicone-Adhesive-Sealant/product-reviews/B000AL6WLA



I agree... but you can get the lid back off, you need ot use real acetone (not nail polish grade) and allow it 30sec to dissolve the polymerized acrlyamide. I know it works.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> @Jpmboy I'm buying an 8086k CPU. ordering it from www.newegg.ca later today. It has to be quite good though to beat my existing 8700k which does 5.1GHZ CPU, 5.1 cache, 4x8GB 3200 CL14 at 4200 with decent timings.
> 
> Likely to be better though, but if not, I can sell it I'm sure.


I'm not getting the 8086k. My usually reliable source of borrowing money wouldn't do it.

They want me to sell my 8700k first, give them the money from it, then they'll lend me the difference. But my 8700k will do 5.1GHZ CPU, 5.1GHZ cache at 1.38v, 4200MHZ 4x8GB memory at 17-17-17-32 2T at 1.45v and there is not a good chance an 8086k would do better. 

No way I'm dropping the 8700k to play the lottery on an 8086k. 

Edit: I just did some math. If I juggle a bill I can pay late, the company is cool that way, I can swing the 8086k on the 15th of the month with a bit of cash from the person that wanted me to sell the 8700k first. :h34r-smi


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> I agree... but you can get the lid back off, you need ot use real acetone (not nail polish grade) and allow it 30sec to dissolve the polymerized acrlyamide. I know it works.


Correct, I know you have to use 100% Acetone for the stuff to be removed. I'm holding off delidding my 8700K until I finally build my system and test the CPU with stock paste so that I can compare the results after delidding. My plan is to use Loctite glue to reseal it and more people seem to be against it which I don't understand.


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> Correct, I know you have to use 100% Acetone for the stuff to be removed. I'm holding off delidding my 8700K until I finally build my system and test the CPU with stock paste so that I can compare the results after delidding. My plan is to use Loctite glue to reseal it and more people seem to be against it which I don't understand.


it is better to use a silicon RTV, but if you do use CG, just use a tiny dab at each corner. This way if you have to redo the LM it's not a major undertaking.


----------



## encrypted11

Glue's a bad idea. RTV's a better bet, a blunt wooden pick (similar to the one rockit provides) with an eraser would remove the RTV perfectly. 

If you don't want to take extra care with the RTV/stock sealant removal, a gentle brillo would work  (Similar to what Kyle of HardOCP has done)


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> it is better to use a silicon RTV, but if you do use CG, just use a tiny dab at each corner. This way if you have to redo the LM it's not a major undertaking.


Argh. When I was doing my research about delidding, I've concluded that reviewers recommended to use Loctite super glue and, yes, just put a dab in each corner. They said it's better than RTV because of the gap it introduces back when relidding. Is this not true?

With RTV, do you also just put a dab in each corner? And is there a "best" RTV to use?


----------



## Scotty99

Anyone try new bios for strix-f? New management engine update apparently.


----------



## wingman99

Scotty99 said:


> Anyone try new bios for strix-f? New management engine update apparently.


I tried it and it bricked my ASUS motherboard.


----------



## encrypted11

Permatex black RTV's the go-to sealant.


----------



## GeneO

kevindd992002 said:


> Argh. When I was doing my research about delidding, I've concluded that reviewers recommended to use Loctite super glue and, yes, just put a dab in each corner. They said it's better than RTV because of the gap it introduces back when relidding. Is this not true?
> 
> With RTV, do you also just put a dab in each corner? And is there a "best" RTV to use?





Why not skip using an adhesive/sealant and let the cooler clamping hold it in place?


----------



## Jpmboy

GeneO said:


> Why not skip using an adhesive/sealant and let the cooler clamping hold it in place?


you can. the socket clamp works fine (just watch for the forward slide the locking mech has. I glue/seal the IHS back on since swapping out cpus is a lot easier when the IHS don;t come off.


----------



## kevindd992002

encrypted11 said:


> Permatex black RTV's the go-to sealant.


Thanks!



GeneO said:


> Why not skip using an adhesive/sealant and let the cooler clamping hold it in place?





Jpmboy said:


> you can. the socket clamp works fine (just watch for the forward slide the locking mech has. I glue/seal the IHS back on since swapping out cpus is a lot easier when the IHS don;t come off.


Same here, I want everything to be "in-place" so to speak. I mean, I can relid so why not.


----------



## rt123

Jpmboy said:


> you can. the socket clamp works fine (just watch for the forward slide the locking mech has. I glue/seal the IHS back on since swapping out cpus is a lot easier when the IHS don;t come off.


JPM.....


You got a 8086K on the way??


----------



## kc5vdj

We need to organize a huge push to get the Impact board back in a new incarnation. It was the only performance-minded ITX board on the market. I just had to buy the Strix when I was hoping an Impact would be out by now. It will be here Wednesday. The 8086K just arrived minutes ago. This chip deserves an Impact board.


----------



## Jpmboy

rt123 said:


> JPM.....
> 
> You got a 8086K on the way??


Retail? Not that I know of. 

Is it really that much better than a good 8700K? 







kc5vdj said:


> We need to organize a huge push to get the Impact board back in a new incarnation. It was the only performance-minded ITX board on the market. I just had to buy the Strix when I was hoping an Impact would be out by now. It will be here Wednesday. The 8086K just arrived minutes ago. This chip deserves an Impact board.


I know of a *good mITX board*.


----------



## feznz

Jpmboy said:


> Retail? Not that I know of.
> 
> Is it really that much better than a good 8700K?
> 
> )



I been wondering that were they binning chips from the release of 8700k or just recently? been looking for review none out so far.....


----------



## rt123

Jpmboy said:


> Retail? Not that I know of.
> 
> Is it really that much better than a good 8700K?


It isn't better if you got a golden 8700K. But if you got the short end of the stick with 8700K (like myself), then results might be better. You get lucky with chips, so I was curious if you were buying any.


----------



## Jpmboy

rt123 said:


> It isn't better if you got a golden 8700K. But if you got the short end of the stick with 8700K (like myself), then results might be better. *You get lucky with chips*, so I was curious if you were buying any.


lol - maybe one retail was a very good one (7700K). All others have been average.  That said, without any lot info, B&H and PC Connection (in vermont) have been "lucky" sources.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> lol - maybe one retail was a very good one (7700K). All others have been average.  That said, without any lot info, B&H and PC Connection (in vermont) have been "lucky" sources.



http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1700666-8086-overclock-results-thread.html#post27493220


----------



## rt123

Jpmboy said:


> lol - maybe one retail was a very good one (7700K). All others have been average.  That said, without any lot info, B&H and PC Connection (in vermont) have been "lucky" sources.


5960X was good as well. You liar.. 

Thanks for the secret sauce.  After the experience I had with 15 or so 8700K, I am not looking to try my luck on retail anymore.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> I'm not getting the 8086k. My usually reliable source of borrowing money wouldn't do it.
> 
> They want me to sell my 8700k first, give them the money from it, then they'll lend me the difference. But my 8700k will do 5.1GHZ CPU, 5.1GHZ cache at 1.38v, 4200MHZ 4x8GB memory at 17-17-17-32 2T at 1.45v and there is not a good chance an 8086k would do better.
> 
> No way I'm dropping the 8700k to play the lottery on an 8086k.
> 
> Edit: I just did some math. If I juggle a bill I can pay late, the company is cool that way, I can swing the 8086k on the 15th of the month with a bit of cash from the person that wanted me to sell the 8700k first. :h34r-smi


Welp, I really debated it. Decided NOT to get the 8086k. I got my 8700k stable at 5.1GHZ core, 5.1GHZ cache, 4300MHZ memory 4x8GB , I really don't think I'd do much better with an 8086k, even delidded.


----------



## kc5vdj

Jpmboy said:


> I know of a *good mITX board*.


Too late. Already ordered the Strix Z370-I from B&H. It'll be here Thursday.


----------



## Jpmboy

rt123 said:


> 5960X was good as well. You liar..
> 
> Thanks for the secret sauce.  After the experience I had with 15 or so 8700K, I am not looking to try my luck on retail anymore.



15? Fifteen? I can see why tho, a 5.0+ 6 core is really quick, and the 8700K has had a rough time getting consistency in the process. IDK, were the early batches actually better? Maybe the quality of the substrate has drifted. I do think the 8086 uses binned substrate - supposedly like the 2700K did before Sandy went EOL.


BTW, just FYI, Menthol and I have done well with PC Con. That 7700K came from there. Turned out to be a good cpu cold too. MLRKllr (?) ... eh, Dave, did well with it.


----------



## bee144

I’m looking at the Maximus X Formula.

Can I can two GPUs, each of them at x8 and have two m.2 SSDs installed (no raid) and expect them to run at x4 each?


----------



## bl4ckdot

bee144 said:


> I’m looking at the Maximus X Formula.
> 
> Can I can two GPUs, each of them at x8 and have two m.2 SSDs installed (no raid) and expect them to run at x4 each?



Sort of. Both m.2 ports go through the chipset lanes. They will run at x4, but the DMI link is a PCIe x4 lane, so you may experience some throttle.


----------



## Xen0nAU

Hi Guys,

Has anyone got any ideas on how to stop the stupid rainbow LED lighting on the Motherboard when the system is shutdown? 

Have tried enabling ERP (S4, S4 + S5) and have also updated to the latest bios version however nothing has been able to correct this for me.

The Motherboard is an Asus ROG Maximus X Hero.

Cheers,


----------



## Jpmboy

Xen0nAU said:


> Hi Guys,
> 
> Has anyone got any ideas on how to stop the stupid rainbow LED lighting on the Motherboard when the system is shutdown?
> 
> Have tried enabling ERP (S4, S4 + S5) and have also updated to the latest bios version however nothing has been able to correct this for me.
> 
> The Motherboard is an Asus ROG Maximus X Hero.
> 
> Cheers,



yeah - set it to OFF in bios, and/or OFF in Aura.


----------



## KedarWolf

Eight core Coffee Lake coming. If oc.net never shortened the URL it would say that in it. 

https://www.techradar.com/news/inte...cessor-will-arrive-this-september-says-report


----------



## kc5vdj

KedarWolf said:


> Eight core Coffee Lake coming. If oc.net never shortened the URL it would say that in it.
> 
> https://www.techradar.com/news/inte...cessor-will-arrive-this-september-says-report


I'd sure buy a ROG Maximus Impact motherboard for it!


----------



## encrypted11

Elmor confirmed no impact.
http://www.overclock.net/forum/6-in...0-vrm-discussion-thread-181.html#post27047881


----------



## KedarWolf

BIOS 1401 available for ROG MAXIMUS X HERO (WI-FI AC)

http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb...5.1411615674.1529098832-1789492725.1529098832

Version 1401
2018/06/158.31 MBytes
ROG MAXIMUS X HERO (WI-FI AC) BIOS 1401
01. Improved DRAM stability
02. Improve system performance.
03. Updated CPU microcode
04. Updated ME firmware


----------



## SpeedyIV

Wow. It's only been 2 months since they released 1301. 1401 says it has updated microcode and ME firmware. Sounds like it is worth installing. Time to flash and re-baseline the overclock I guess. Who could pass up 

01. Improved DRAM stability
02. Improve system performance.
03. Updated CPU microcode
04. Updated ME firmware


----------



## Khalil

KedarWolf said:


> BIOS 1401 available for ROG MAXIMUS X HERO (WI-FI AC)
> 
> http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb...5.1411615674.1529098832-1789492725.1529098832
> 
> Version 1401
> 2018/06/158.31 MBytes
> ROG MAXIMUS X HERO (WI-FI AC) BIOS 1401
> 01. Improved DRAM stability
> 02. Improve system performance.
> 03. Updated CPU microcode
> 04. Updated ME firmware


Regular Hero 1401 Bios as well but not displayed in the support page.
http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1151/ROG_MAXIMUS_X_HERO/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO-ASUS-1401.zip


edit: hmm seems if you select w10 32bit it shows up but not 64bit.


----------



## bl4ckdot

I have tested this morning the 1401 on my Formula. Happy so far. No performance loss on memory or CPU (I just did some cinebench and CPU Z runs, nothing serious).
I saw these new values on my settings dump : 

tRd2RdSG [0]
tRd2RdDG [0]
tRd2RdDR [0]
tRd2RdDD [0]
tRd2WrSG [0]
tRd2WrDG [0]
tRd2WrDR [0]
tRd2WrDD [0]
tWr2RdSG [0]
tWr2RdDG [0]
tWr2RdDR [0]
tWr2RdDD [0]
tWr2WrSG [0]
tWr2WrDG [0]
tWr2WrDR [0]
tWr2WrDD [0]


I guess it has to do with RAM ? I was not able to find these in the bios.


What I hope is fixed for me, is the random fan speed that ramps up for no reason for 1sec.


----------



## GAN77

Hi guys! Who tested the new bios 1401 on MAXIMUS X Code?


----------



## GeneO

I did. So far no problems here. Tested my 5 GHz OC is still good.


----------



## GAN77

GeneO said:


> I did. So far no problems here. Tested my 5 GHz OC is still good.


Thanks for the response!


----------



## GeneO

GAN77 said:


> Thanks for the response!



Note that since there is a Intel Management Engine firmware update in this BIOS, you need to use EZFlash to update the BIOS - it will first update the IME FW as a separate step. Updating the BIOS through flashback will not update the IME FW (it is in an section of the BIOS that is protected against updating when the BIOS is updated).


----------



## wingman99

GeneO said:


> Note that since there is a Intel Management Engine firmware update in this BIOS, you need to use EZFlash to update the BIOS - it will first update the IME FW as a separate step. Updating the BIOS through flashback will not update the IME FW (it is in an section of the BIOS that is protected against updating when the BIOS is updated).


Yes when updated my ASUS it said that I needed to reboot to update then I did the update and it would not start up it bricked my board.


----------



## GeneO

wingman99 said:


> Yes when updated my ASUS it said that I needed to reboot to update then I did the update and it would not start up it bricked my board.



Damn, sorry to hear that.


----------



## wingman99

GeneO said:


> Damn, sorry to hear that.


Thanks. I was liking ASUS better than Gigabyte, the memory overclocked so well.


----------



## feznz

wingman99 said:


> Yes when updated my ASUS it said that I needed to reboot to update then I did the update and it would not start up it bricked my board.


https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...-update-recovered-by-ASUS-s-flashback-process!


----------



## GeneO

feznz said:


> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...-update-recovered-by-ASUS-s-flashback-process!



I doubt flashback won't fix a borked IME update but worth a try.


----------



## wingman99

feznz said:


> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...-update-recovered-by-ASUS-s-flashback-process!


Thanks for the suggestion. However, my ASUS Tuf Z370 Gaming plus does not have flashback. It has CrashFree BIOS 3 and would not post up to start it.


----------



## KedarWolf

wingman99 said:


> Thanks for the suggestion. However, my ASUS Tuf Z370 Gaming plus does not have flashback. It has CrashFree BIOS 3 and would not post up to start it.




https://www.asus.com/support/FAQ/1012219/ How To Use Crash Free BIOS 3.


----------



## kc5vdj

KedarWolf said:


> https://www.asus.com/support/FAQ/1012219/ How To Use Crash Free BIOS 3.


Will CrashFree BIOS handle if the Strix Z370-I Gaming motherboard doesn't actually have the latest BIOS? I bought it for an i7-8086K, and only thought about this after I had the chip and the motherboard was on the way.

I still need to get RAM, but I have everything in the Corsair 380T waiting for RAM. Will the board boot far enough to let me flash it if it has the previous BIOS?

https://d.pr/i/mO8eHT


----------



## wingman99

KedarWolf said:


> https://www.asus.com/support/FAQ/1012219/ How To Use Crash Free BIOS 3.


Thanks. However, like I said it won't do the first step.


> Step 1: Turn on the system.


----------



## CRJ84

Where do you guys find the latest Chipset and ME drivers for you Asus board?

Mine is Hero x z370 and the drivers are from last year 2017.

A z370 board on MSI webpage has latests ME driver and chipset driver from last month.


----------



## Jpmboy

CRJ84 said:


> Where do you guys find the latest Chipset and ME drivers for you Asus board?
> 
> Mine is Hero x z370 and the drivers are from last year 2017.
> 
> A z370 board on MSI webpage has latests ME driver and chipset driver from last month.



did you check the support page for your MB on the ASUS website??


----------



## CRJ84

Jpmboy said:


> did you check the support page for your MB on the ASUS website??



Yes, it is the same for you Apex board, not updated since 2017.

If you check MSI webpage for thier z370 boards the Chipset and ME drivers are updated.


----------



## Jpmboy

CRJ84 said:


> Yes, it is the same for you Apex board, not updated since 2017.
> 
> If you check MSI webpage for thier z370 boards the Chipset and ME drivers are updated.


 Look again Bro, last Max X Apex bios update was June 15, 2008. 











https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-APEX/HelpDesk_BIOS/


----------



## CRJ84

Jpmboy said:


> Look again Bro, last Max X Apex bios update was June 15, 2008.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-APEX/HelpDesk_BIOS/



Sorry I am not talking about BIOS update, I am talking about Chipset and ME drivers.
Look under chipset driver section, not able to post a picture not sure why.

Also i spoke with Intel support yesterday, and they said that Asus had to provide these drivers, that is why you cannot download them on Intels website for the 8700k.


----------



## wingman99

CRJ84 said:


> Sorry I am not talking about BIOS update, I am talking about Chipset and ME drivers.
> Look under chipset driver section, not able to post a picture not sure why.
> 
> Also i spoke with Intel support yesterday, and they said that Asus had to provide these drivers, that is why you cannot download them on Intels website for the 8700k.


I would not worry, I use windows default inf chipset file and ME driver and never had a problem.

Here are Intel's if you wan't to use them.

https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/20775/Intel-Chipset-Device-Software-INF-Update-Utility-

https://downloadcenter.intel.com/do...ngine-Driver-for-Windows-7-8-1-and-Windows-10


----------



## SpeedyIV

wingman99 said:


> I would not worry, I use windows default inf chipset file and ME driver and never had a problem.
> 
> Here are Intel's if you wan't to use them.
> 
> https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/20775/Intel-Chipset-Device-Software-INF-Update-Utility-
> 
> https://downloadcenter.intel.com/do...ngine-Driver-for-Windows-7-8-1-and-Windows-10


I took a look at these and neither of them list the Z370 chipset or the i7-8700K. Are you sure these are the correct ones for this platform? I recently updated my Maximus 10 Hero (wifi) to BIOS 1401 using EZ flash utility and the direct internet download option. Afterwards I looked in Device Manager at the IME driver. It says version 11.7.0.10045 dated 10-3-2017. I downloaded the Intel MEI zip file from the link you provided, which is v11.7.0.1068. The Windows 10-64 driver TeeDriverW8x64.sys file is dated 11/27/2017. So I don't know if the BIOS update included an MEI update. It was supposed to but I did not check what driver was there before I updated the BIOS to 1401. The Intel one at the link you provided looks newer but I don't see Z370 or the i7-8700K in their list for the MEI download. Am I confused? (YES). Thanks in advance for any guidance.

PS - According to SIV, my CPU microcode is version 0094 revision date 04/26/2018. I didn't check the version of this before the BIOS update either so I am not sure if it changed. Asus support site for BIOS 1401 says:

ROG MAXIMUS X HERO (WI-FI AC) BIOS 1401
01. Improved DRAM stability
02. Improve system performance.
03. Updated CPU microcode
04. Updated ME firmware

Thanks !


----------



## wingman99

SpeedyIV said:


> I took a look at these and neither of them list the Z370 chipset or the i7-8700K. Are you sure these are the correct ones for this platform? I recently updated my Maximus 10 Hero (wifi) to BIOS 1401 using EZ flash utility and the direct internet download option. Afterwards I looked in Device Manager at the IME driver. It says version 11.7.0.10045 dated 10-3-2017. I downloaded the Intel MEI zip file from the link you provided, which is v11.7.0.1068. The Windows 10-64 driver TeeDriverW8x64.sys file is dated 11/27/2017. So I don't know if the BIOS update included an MEI update. It was supposed to but I did not check what driver was there before I updated the BIOS to 1401. The Intel one at the link you provided looks newer but I don't see Z370 or the i7-8700K in their list for the MEI download. Am I confused? (YES). Thanks in advance for any guidance.
> 
> PS - According to SIV, my CPU microcode is version 0094 revision date 04/26/2018. I didn't check the version of this before the BIOS update either so I am not sure if it changed. Asus support site for BIOS 1401 says:
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS X HERO (WI-FI AC) BIOS 1401
> 01. Improved DRAM stability
> 02. Improve system performance.
> 03. Updated CPU microcode
> 04. Updated ME firmware
> 
> Thanks !


The Intel software that I Posted will detect the Chipset and install the correct INF for one and Driver for the other.

Also update your BIOS.


----------



## Jpmboy

@*SpeedyIV* hey bud - the updated bios includes the new ME and uCode. Use bios 1401 with the chipset driver listed as most recent. If you want a different chipset package, it can be found and downloaded directly from intel... but you do not need to. 
and don;t forget, Windows will push out uCode updates if necessary. So, compare the Bios listed version (before OS handoff) to the version shown by SIV or AID64


----------



## SpeedyIV

*Hmmm...*



Jpmboy said:


> @*SpeedyIV* hey bud - the updated bios includes the new ME and uCode. Use bios 1401 with the chipset driver listed as most recent. If you want a different chipset package, it can be found and downloaded directly from intel... but you do not need to.
> and don;t forget, Windows will push out uCode updates if necessary. So, compare the Bios listed version (before OS handoff) to the version shown by SIV or AID64


Yeah that is what I thought, but after I updated to 1401 I opened Device Manager / System Devices / Intel Management Engine Interface, opened Properties and looked on the Driver tab. It says Driver Version 11.7.0.1045, Driver Date 10/3/2017. So is this the new one or am I looking at the wrong thing? After the BIOS update I figured I would check it. If I am looking in the right place, it does not look like the latest.

Will the Bios version before OS handoff necessarily be different than the post OS handoff version? Does one overwrite the other? I don't get how ME and uCode can be pushed in a BIOS update (if you elect to update), AND a Windows update based event. Who wins? My guess is Bios 1401 and Windows are doing what they are supposed to do and I have some reading to do..

Thanks!


----------



## kc5vdj

I guess I had to answer my own question by way of Asus Tech Support.

It seems my motherboard shipped with BIOS 0428, to see my CPU, I'd have to flash it to 0805. It not only won't see my CPU, it won't see twenty others, it will only see the original six Cannon Lake chips. They said that the only way to deal with it was to RMA the board. What sucks is that the RAM comes in Monday, and I just got the T.B. Vegas Quad fans from a guy in Tokyo in the mail today.

The board looks good otherwise, but this is really irritating. If anyone is interested in config, see my "The Honeycomb Hideout" build below.


----------



## wingman99

kc5vdj said:


> I guess I had to answer my own question by way of Asus Tech Support.
> 
> It seems my motherboard shipped with BIOS 0428, to see my CPU, I'd have to flash it to 0805. It not only won't see my CPU, it won't see twenty others, it will only see the original six Cannon Lake chips. They said that the only way to deal with it was to RMA the board. What sucks is that the RAM comes in Monday, and I just got the T.B. Vegas Quad fans from a guy in Tokyo in the mail today.
> 
> The board looks good otherwise, but this is really irritating. If anyone is interested in config, see my "The Honeycomb Hideout" build below.


So your saying that the 8086k will not run on that board without a BIOS update first?


----------



## kevindd992002

GeneO said:


> Note that since there is a Intel Management Engine firmware update in this BIOS, you need to use EZFlash to update the BIOS - it will first update the IME FW as a separate step. Updating the BIOS through flashback will not update the IME FW (it is in an section of the BIOS that is protected against updating when the BIOS is updated).


So is it safe to say that it's always better to use EZFlash rather than using Flashback? That's a bummer! I was liking how Flashback works for me but I'm glad I read this caution before I tried updating my X Code to the latest BIOS version. Most people won't know about this as they don't tend to read changelogs until after upgrading.


----------



## GeneO

kevindd992002 said:


> GeneO said:
> 
> 
> 
> Note that since there is a Intel Management Engine firmware update in this BIOS, you need to use EZFlash to update the BIOS - it will first update the IME FW as a separate step. Updating the BIOS through flashback will not update the IME FW (it is in an section of the BIOS that is protected against updating when the BIOS is updated).
> 
> 
> 
> So is it safe to say that it's always better to use EZFlash rather than using Flashback? That's a bummer! I was liking how Flashback works for me but I'm glad I read this caution before I tried updating my X Code to the latest BIOS version. Most people won't know about this as they don't tend to read changelogs until after upgrading.
Click to expand...

No, only that if there is a IME firmware update accompanying the BIOS update, you need to use EZupdate. Using flashback won't update IME.


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> No, only that if there is a IME firmware update accompanying the BIOS update, you need to use EZupdate. Using flashback won't update IME.


If USB Flashback in the best way to normally flash a BIOS it might be a good idea to do EZUpdate initially, but use USB Flashback and flash the BIOS again after the IME update is flashed with EZUpdate.


----------



## feznz

So after all of this I haven't updated from 1101 (beta) bios basically it is it aint broke don't fix it scenario 

Did anyone find any advantages with 1401 over previous Bios?


----------



## kc5vdj

wingman99 said:


> So your saying that the 8086k will not run on that board without a BIOS update first?


At least the board I bought from B&H, that one could be old stock though, so I can't speak for the ones at other retailers. The one I got has BIOS version 0428, which means that it won't even do the 20 chips that intel released in the main wave of Cannon Lake as well, only the original six chips. The i7-8086K needs BIOS 0805 which is even newer than that.

I would hope that other retailers are getting fresh boards that have been flashed at the factory to current.


----------



## Jpmboy

kc5vdj said:


> At least the board I bought from B&H, that one could be old stock though, so I can't speak for the ones at other retailers. The one I got has BIOS version 0428, which means that it won't even do the 20 chips that intel released in the main wave of Cannon Lake as well, only the original six chips. The i7-8086K needs BIOS 0805 which is even newer than that.
> 
> I would hope that other retailers are getting fresh boards that have been flashed at the factory to current.



it is really trivial to flash the board to the most recent bios. Just use EZ-Flash from within bios. it like the "Easy Button".


----------



## Scotty99

So do i need to update the chipset drivers along with the bios that indicates a ME update? 

I wish asus had a stand alone driver checker that did these things automatically like asrock and msi (and probably gigabyte) have. Unless im missing something you need to install AI suite along with this software, which i really dont need.

Im also still using windows 1709 because nvidia STILL hasnt fixed gsync with windowed mode with 1803 which is almost 3 months old by now. Only recently did they even admit it wasnt functioning properly, before people like me insisted it was broken they steadfast denied it and they couldn't reproduce it lol.


----------



## KedarWolf

Scotty99 said:


> So do i need to update the chipset drivers along with the bios that indicates a ME update?
> 
> I wish asus had a stand alone driver checker that did these things automatically like asrock and msi (and probably gigabyte) have. Unless im missing something you need to install AI suite along with this software, which i really dont need.
> 
> Im also still using windows 1709 because nvidia STILL hasnt fixed gsync with windowed mode with 1803 which is almost 3 months old by now. Only recently did they even admit it wasnt functioning properly, before people like me insisted it was broken they steadfast denied it and they couldn't reproduce it lol.


https://forums.geforce.com/default/...s/gsync-full-and-windowed-borderless-low-fps/

Disabling Fast Boot and the Nvidia Inspector fix fixes it in 1803. 

Never mind, G-Sync in fullscreen windowed not working even with the fixes. 

Wait, if you put 'Application Mode' and 'Global Mode' 'Fullscreen And Windowed' G-Sync works...


----------



## GeneO

Yeah, I am struggling with 1401. My 5 GHz was stable at 1.376v on 1101, but 1401 I get WHEA errors (correctable) even at 1.396v. I hope it is not the fault of the IME update, as I don't know how to roll that back.


----------



## wingman99

GeneO said:


> Yeah, I am struggling with 1401. My 5 GHz was stable at 1.376v on 1101, but 1401 I get WHEA errors (correctable) even at 1.396v. I hope it is not the fault of the IME update, as I don't know how to roll that back.


Correctable is parity errors caches and system memory.


----------



## GeneO

wingman99 said:


> Correctable is parity errors caches and system memory.



I know. It was L0 cache, which meant more vcore. I increased from 1.376 to 1.394 which didn't help. I am just running realbench v 2.43 stress test (which doesn't have much AVX).



I rolled back to 1101 (with the updated IME firmware) and I didn't see the errors. However that reverted the microcode back to 0x84 from 0x94. So I have patched the BIOS for microcode 0x94. So I have 1101 + 0x94 microcode + latest IME firmware and am testing this. Will report back.


----------



## wingman99

GeneO said:


> I know. It was L0 cache, which meant more vcore. I increased from 1.376 to 1.394 which didn't help. I am just running realbench v 2.43 stress test (which doesn't have much AVX).
> 
> 
> 
> I rolled back to 1101 (with the updated IME firmware) and I didn't see the errors. However that reverted the microcode back to 0x84 from 0x94. So I have patched the BIOS for microcode 0x94. So I have 1101 + 0x94 microcode + latest IME firmware and am testing this. Will report back.


Does WHEA tell what cache it is Cores Cache Vcore or Uncore shared cache Vccio Vccsa?


----------



## kc5vdj

Jpmboy said:


> it is really trivial to flash the board to the most recent bios. Just use EZ-Flash from within bios. it like the "Easy Button".


But that only works if I spend even more money than the RMA will cost in shipping, and get a bottom of the line Celery or Pentium that I'll NEVER be able to resell in order to do so.


----------



## Jpmboy

@kc5vdj what money? you can flash the bios with no CPU in the socket using the bios flash back method. Just put the board on the box it came in, attach the PSU atx connector, put a USB stick (fat32 formatted) in the FB port (with the unzipped bios, renamed correctly - see your manual), and press the bios flash button on the IO panel for 3 SEC until the button begins to flash, wait for it to stop flashing (can take a few minutes) and viola - your bios is updated. There's an ASUS ROG uTube video out there - you can search it. Then stick your cpu in and update the ME any number of ways... including reflashing using EZ flash if the FB method does not update the uCode (which it should). 

Done.


----------



## GeneO

wingman99 said:


> GeneO said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know. It was L0 cache, which meant more vcore. I increased from 1.376 to 1.394 which didn't help. I am just running realbench v 2.43 stress test (which doesn't have much AVX).
> 
> 
> 
> I rolled back to 1101 (with the updated IME firmware) and I didn't see the errors. However that reverted the microcode back to 0x84 from 0x94. So I have patched the BIOS for microcode 0x94. So I have 1101 + 0x94 microcode + latest IME firmware and am testing this. Will report back.
> 
> 
> 
> Does WHEA tell what cache it is Cores Cache Vcore or Uncore shared cache Vccio Vccsa?
Click to expand...

I said L0 cache.


----------



## feznz

GeneO said:


> I know. It was L0 cache, which meant more vcore. I increased from 1.376 to 1.394 which didn't help. I am just running realbench v 2.43 stress test (which doesn't have much AVX).
> 
> 
> 
> I rolled back to 1101 (with the updated IME firmware) and I didn't see the errors. However that reverted the microcode back to 0x84 from 0x94. So I have patched the BIOS for microcode 0x94. So I have 1101 + 0x94 microcode + latest IME firmware and am testing this. Will report back.



Thanks for that I will stick with 1101 my favorite bios so far


----------



## CRJ84

GeneO said:


> I know. It was L0 cache, which meant more vcore. I increased from 1.376 to 1.394 which didn't help. I am just running realbench v 2.43 stress test (which doesn't have much AVX).
> 
> 
> 
> I rolled back to 1101 (with the updated IME firmware) and I didn't see the errors. However that reverted the microcode back to 0x84 from 0x94. So I have patched the BIOS for microcode 0x94. So I have 1101 + 0x94 microcode + latest IME firmware and am testing this. Will report back.


I have the exact same problem, tried to go back to 1301 but it did not work, I had to back down my oc.
At 5/5.2 any memory oc would make the system unstable but everything was fine before 1401, so I am at 5/5.1 now and it works again.


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> I know. It was L0 cache, which meant more vcore. I increased from 1.376 to 1.394 which didn't help. I am just running realbench v 2.43 stress test (which doesn't have much AVX).
> 
> 
> 
> I rolled back to 1101 (with the updated IME firmware) and I didn't see the errors. However that reverted the microcode back to 0x84 from 0x94. So I have patched the BIOS for microcode 0x94. So I have 1101 + 0x94 microcode + latest IME firmware and am testing this. Will report back.


Can you upload the 1101 BIOS with the latest microcode to Google Drive or something and share it here?

I tried to figure out adding the latest microcode from winraid forums and too confusing for me.


----------



## GAN77

GeneO said:


> So I have patched the BIOS for microcode 0x94. So I have 1101 + 0x94 microcode + latest IME firmware and am testing this. Will report back.


How did you patch the Bios?


----------



## GeneO

GAN77 said:


> How did you patch the Bios?



UBU tool. I tried 0x96 microcode too. 



All new things combined was worst (more frequent WHEA) . I am at 1101 with 0x84 microcode but latest IME. I still get them.


Next weekend, I am going to try to downgrade the ME firmware by removing the CPU and using flashback to flash 1101 BIOS and see if it will downgrade the ME firmware.


----------



## kc5vdj

Jpmboy said:


> @kc5vdj what money? you can flash the bios with no CPU in the socket using the bios flash back method. Just put the board on the box it came in, attach the PSU atx connector, put a USB stick (fat32 formatted) in the FB port (with the unzipped bios, renamed correctly - see your manual), and press the bios flash button on the IO panel for 3 SEC until the button begins to flash, wait for it to stop flashing (can take a few minutes) and viola - your bios is updated. There's an ASUS ROG uTube video out there - you can search it. Then stick your cpu in and update the ME any number of ways... including reflashing using EZ flash if the FB method does not update the uCode (which it should).
> 
> Done.


I think you are confusing the ROG Strix Z370-I GAMING with a Maximus Impact (AWOL for two chipset generations) board or something. There is no BIOS Flashback button. There is an 8 pin flash ROM near the CPU socket, and it has a little poly ribbon header right next to it and the clear CMOS pins.

I do have an untested TL866A programmer, and the eight pin clip, which honestly is a bit hard to set onto the pins for in-circuit programming, plus the fact that i'd have to rig a jig to get it's connector into the programmer, and warranty issues if I do, so I'm counting that out as an option for now.

The only possibility otherwise would be to give Crashfree a try. In my understanding, Crashfree should assume a corrupted BIOS, and thus maybe not do CPU checks first or attempt to load microcode, and thus might allow me to flash. I will try this, and it is the only thing that MIGHT work that is described in the manual.

i can test options today, I guess, the RAM will be arriving, but I think Tech Support was right, and that the board would have to be RMAed.


----------



## wingman99

GeneO said:


> I said L0 cache.


What WHEA report is shared Cache?


----------



## renhanxue

I remember that it was stated a while ago that you no longer need to set IA AC/DC Load Line to 0.01, because setting SVID Behavior to "Best case" would already do that for you. So when I was fiddling around after updating the BIOS recently I figured I'd leaving the load line settings at auto after changing SVID behavior, but, uh, yeah, I really can't recommend doing that. I was running in adaptive mode at 49x with voltage set to 1.36v and LLC at level 5 (this chip really isn't much of an overclocker, it needs like 1.33-1.34v to be fully stable under load at 4.9GHz _after_ delidding), and when I got into windows and launched HWInfo it claimed that my VCore was now over 1.5v. Needless to say I didn't really stick around to verify, I just immediately rebooted and set the load line settings back to 0.01 and everything was back to normal with a small vdroop instead of a 0.15v overshoot. What's up with that?

Oh, and this was on a Maximus X Hero, fwiw.

Unrelatedly, on the Hero, what's the default VRM switching frequency? I've gathered that the Infineon Optimos power stages are actually optimized for 500kHz, which is the max you can set in BIOS, so I was just wondering if I should go set that manually or if it does that automatically. My current overclock works and I'm not really running heavy loads all that much, so I've left it at auto with a vague idea that maybe it'll save some power or something. I suspect though that what it does when you overclock though is be helpful and disable VRM spread spectrum, set phase count to "all phases all the time" and switching frequency to 500kHz.


----------



## wingman99

renhanxue said:


> I remember that it was stated a while ago that you no longer need to set IA AC/DC Load Line to 0.01, because setting SVID Behavior to "Best case" would already do that for you. So when I was fiddling around after updating the BIOS recently I figured I'd leaving the load line settings at auto after changing SVID behavior, but, uh, yeah, I really can't recommend doing that. I was running in adaptive mode at 49x with voltage set to 1.36v and LLC at level 5 (this chip really isn't much of an overclocker, it needs like 1.33-1.34v to be fully stable under load at 4.9GHz _after_ delidding), and when I got into windows and launched HWInfo it claimed that my VCore was now over 1.5v. Needless to say I didn't really stick around to verify, I just immediately rebooted and set the load line settings back to 0.01 and everything was back to normal with a small vdroop instead of a 0.15v overshoot. What's up with that?
> 
> Oh, and this was on a Maximus X Hero, fwiw.
> 
> Unrelatedly, on the Hero, what's the default VRM switching frequency? I've gathered that the Infineon Optimos power stages are actually optimized for 500kHz, which is the max you can set in BIOS, so I was just wondering if I should go set that manually or if it does that automatically. My current overclock works and I'm not really running heavy loads all that much, so I've left it at auto with a vague idea that maybe it'll save some power or something. I suspect though that what it does when you overclock though is be helpful and disable VRM spread spectrum, set phase count to "all phases all the time" and switching frequency to 500kHz.


IA AC/DC Load Line to 0.01 lowers the processor VID table command to the VRM to lower the Vcore.
Example:
prime95 small FFT
Overclocking 4.7GHz LLC AUTO, Select DVID +0.080v = 1.188v 
Prime95 Small FFT.
Overclocking 4.7GHz, LLC AUTO, IA AC loadline 1, IA DC loadline 1, Select DVID +0.200v = 1.188v


----------



## renhanxue

wingman99 said:


> IA AC/DC Load Line to 0.01 lowers the processor VID table command to the VRM to lower the Vcore.
> Example:
> prime95 small FFT
> Overclocking 4.7GHz LLC AUTO, Select DVID +0.080v = 1.188v
> Prime95 Small FFT.
> Overclocking 4.7GHz, LLC AUTO, IA AC loadline 1, IA DC loadline 1, Select DVID +0.200v = 1.188v


I know what the IA AC/DC Load Line settings _do_ (effectively, control the slope of the load line, or in other words, the vdroop - kinda), but if I didn't already know, that answer is so cryptic it really wouldn't have made me any wiser. It's beside the point though, because you're answering a question I didn't ask.

To rephrase the question: earlier somewhere in this thread (I can't be bothered digging up the exact post) someone - and I'm pretty sure it was Raja - said that the standing recommendation to set 0.01 was superfluous when paired with setting SVID behavior to "best case", because doing the latter would also automatically cause the former. In my testing this definitely does not seem to be the case, and I'm wondering why that is.


----------



## ArneR

I can confirm, setting svid behavior to "best case" does not equal setting ac dc loadline = 0.01 on my Maximus X Hero nonwifi. This was tested on bios 1301, have not bothered flashing the newest yet. VID and vcore got bumped up conciderably over what I would like.

EDIT: Setting ac dc llc to 0.01 overrides any and all input in regards to svid behavior, meaning changing it to auto, best, worst changes nothing. I think svid behavior is useless on this board.


----------



## SpeedyIV

renhanxue said:


> I know what the IA AC/DC Load Line settings _do_ (effectively, control the slope of the load line, or in other words, the vdroop - kinda), but if I didn't already know, that answer is so cryptic it really wouldn't have made me any wiser. It's beside the point though, because you're answering a question I didn't ask.
> 
> To rephrase the question: earlier somewhere in this thread (I can't be bothered digging up the exact post) someone - and I'm pretty sure it was Raja - said that the standing recommendation to set 0.01 was superfluous when paired with setting SVID behavior to "best case", because doing the latter would also automatically cause the former. In my testing this definitely does not seem to be the case, and I'm wondering why that is.


You are correct - Raja did say that on this forum in this thread, on February 9, 2018.

"Just a note: no need to set both SVD to best case and AC/DC load line to 0.01. They both have the same function. So, if you set SVID to best case, you don't need to adjust the AC/DC load line settings because it sets the AC and DC load lines to 0.01." 

Here is a link to his post that said that. He goes on to say that "Best Case" sets both to 0.01. Of course that was an earlier BIOS. That same day he released test BIOSes for a bunch of different boards for Test builds for applying negative offset to adaptive voltage.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...-official-support-thread-69.html#post26720305


----------



## Jpmboy

kc5vdj said:


> I think you are confusing the ROG Strix Z370-I GAMING with a Maximus Impact (AWOL for two chipset generations) board or something. There is no BIOS Flashback button. There is an 8 pin flash ROM near the CPU socket, and it has a little poly ribbon header right next to it and the clear CMOS pins.
> 
> I do have an untested TL866A programmer, and the eight pin clip, which honestly is a bit hard to set onto the pins for in-circuit programming, plus the fact that i'd have to rig a jig to get it's connector into the programmer, and warranty issues if I do, so I'm counting that out as an option for now.
> 
> The only possibility otherwise would be to give Crashfree a try. In my understanding, Crashfree should assume a corrupted BIOS, and thus maybe not do CPU checks first or attempt to load microcode, and thus might allow me to flash. I will try this, and it is the only thing that MIGHT work that is described in the manual.
> 
> i can test options today, I guess, the RAM will be arriving, but I think Tech Support was right, and that the board would have to be RMAed.


 ugh - sorry bud. I thought that board had a bios button. So yeah - crash-free might work for this purpose. I have used it in the past (z170 MAximus... I put the recovery bios on an old mechanical HDD and it worked fine. Saved pulling the bios chip.  ) If you'd rather not RMA, you could always pick up any cheapo 1151 2 core cpu and use it for the flash, then sell the CPU. Not ideal at all.


----------



## kc5vdj

Jpmboy said:


> ugh - sorry bud. I thought that board had a bios button. So yeah - crash-free might work for this purpose. I have used it in the past (z170 MAximus... I put the recovery bios on an old mechanical HDD and it worked fine. Saved pulling the bios chip.  ) If you'd rather not RMA, you could always pick up any cheapo 1151 2 core cpu and use it for the flash, then sell the CPU. Not ideal at all.


Well, well, well... Tech Support didn't know what the hell it was talking about. RMA my a**!

As you can see, instead of going into CrashFree 3, it actually POSTed, with a single beep! I used the UEFI menus to flash it to 0805.



















The only real snag I ran into was that I had to snip off the tab on the 8-pin power connector to fit the H100i v2 back in.










I'll have to work on cable management, and hook up the drives, but at this point, it's a working system!



















I may have only paid $69.99 (after rebates) for the Corsair Graphite 380T on June 1, 2015, but it's a nice case (and no longer a virgin!), and I'd even say that it might be worth what people are charging on eBay these days. It is actually a breeze to build in compared to so many other mini-ITX cases!


----------



## Jpmboy

roc n roll


----------



## kc5vdj

Jpmboy said:


> roc n roll


Yes indeed!

I'll put some preliminary OC results into the 8086K OC results thread by next weekend. Need to deal with basics first, and get baselines on temps, etc. I already have the Rockit Cool delidder, and their copper IHS (wanna keep the original IHS pristine). I'll be running it like I am running my 4790K, with conductonaut under and kryonaut over.


----------



## Scotty99

Does anyone know how to get asus AI charging to work? I have the driver installed and in the notification area it is there but with a red x over it, indicating its not functioning. Ive tried usb 2, usb 3 and the red port (i assume thats 3.1). There are no options that come up when you double click nor are there with right clicking the icon.


----------



## wingman99

renhanxue said:


> I remember that it was stated a while ago that you no longer need to set IA AC/DC Load Line to 0.01, because setting SVID Behavior to "Best case" would already do that for you. So when I was fiddling around after updating the BIOS recently I figured I'd leaving the load line settings at auto after changing SVID behavior, but, uh, yeah, I really can't recommend doing that. I was running in adaptive mode at 49x with voltage set to 1.36v and LLC at level 5 (this chip really isn't much of an overclocker, it needs like 1.33-1.34v to be fully stable under load at 4.9GHz _after_ delidding), and when I got into windows and launched HWInfo it claimed that my VCore was now over 1.5v. Needless to say I didn't really stick around to verify, I just immediately rebooted and set the load line settings back to 0.01 and everything was back to normal with a small vdroop instead of a 0.15v overshoot. What's up with that?
> 
> Oh, and this was on a Maximus X Hero, fwiw.
> 
> Unrelatedly, on the Hero, what's the default VRM switching frequency? I've gathered that the Infineon Optimos power stages are actually optimized for 500kHz, which is the max you can set in BIOS, so I was just wondering if I should go set that manually or if it does that automatically. My current overclock works and I'm not really running heavy loads all that much, so I've left it at auto with a vague idea that maybe it'll save some power or something. I suspect though that what it does when you overclock though is be helpful and disable VRM spread spectrum, set phase count to "all phases all the time" and switching frequency to 500kHz.






renhanxue said:


> I know what the IA AC/DC Load Line settings _do_ (*effectively, control the slope of the load line, or in other words, the vdroop - kinda*), but if I didn't already know, that answer is so cryptic it really wouldn't have made me any wiser. It's beside the point though, because you're answering a question I didn't ask.
> 
> To rephrase the question: earlier somewhere in this thread (I can't be bothered digging up the exact post) someone - and I'm pretty sure it was Raja - said that the standing recommendation to set 0.01 was superfluous when paired with setting SVID behavior to "best case", because doing the latter would also automatically cause the former. In my testing this definitely does not seem to be the case, and I'm wondering why that is.


I don't know were your coming from. However, when using IA AC/DC 0.01 I have to increase the Adaptive Core voltage to have the same Vcore as without the use IA AC/DC 0.01. You need to do the opposite.


----------



## renhanxue

As far as I understand the load line settings, they control the slope of the, well, load line, or by how much the vcore drops with increasing current load on the CPU. To take an easily calculated example: at a hypothetical zero load (0 amperes going through the CPU), VID = vcore. Let's say that our hypothetical VID is fixed at 1.2v regardless of load. Now, if you have a load line setting of 1.0 milli-Ohm, then pushing 1 A of current through the CPU will give you 1 millivolt of vdroop, and we're getting a vcore of 1.199v. Pushing 50 A will give you 0.05v of vdroop, and we're getting a vcore of 1.15v. This is pretty much Ohm's law - V = I * R.

So far it would seem that setting a larger load line setting would just lead to more vdroop and you'd have to set the VID higher to get the same effective voltage. However, I think what's happening here is that these settings also affect how big the effect of the LLC setting is - with a higher load line setting, a given LLC setting would have to push the vcore up higher to get the same effect in practice. That would explain why I'm seeing a big overshoot with LLC 5 and load line at auto (presumably greater than 0.01) but not with load line at 0.01.

The BIOS documentation text by the way claims that the setting is in 1/100th of mOhms, which seems suspiciously small. Someone who is actually an expert at this, feel free to chime in. I'm essentially just reasoning from first principles here.


----------



## wingman99

renhanxue said:


> As far as I understand the load line settings, they control the slope of the, well, load line, or by how much the vcore drops with increasing current load on the CPU. To take an easily calculated example: at a hypothetical zero load (0 amperes going through the CPU), VID = vcore. Let's say that our hypothetical VID is fixed at 1.2v regardless of load. Now, if you have a load line setting of 1.0 milli-Ohm, then pushing 1 A of current through the CPU will give you 1 millivolt of vdroop, and we're getting a vcore of 1.199v. Pushing 50 A will give you 0.05v of vdroop, and we're getting a vcore of 1.15v. This is pretty much Ohm's law - V = I * R.
> 
> So far it would seem that setting a larger load line setting would just lead to more vdroop and you'd have to set the VID higher to get the same effective voltage. However, I think what's happening here is that these settings also affect how big the effect of the LLC setting is - with a higher load line setting, a given LLC setting would have to push the vcore up higher to get the same effect in practice. That would explain why I'm seeing a big overshoot with LLC 5 and load line at auto (presumably greater than 0.01) but not with load line at 0.01.
> 
> The BIOS documentation text by the way claims that the setting is in 1/100th of mOhms, which seems suspiciously small. Someone who is actually an expert at this, feel free to chime in. I'm essentially just reasoning from first principles here.


I believe it is the load line of SVID (signal voltage identification digital)in the processor.

Here is the test settings and output on my PC.
4.7GHz, Power saving features disabled, LLC AUTO, IA AC/DC 0.01, offset +0.200v = idle 1.320v, Prime95 1.188v.
4.7GHz, Power saving features disabled, LLC AUTO, IA AC/DC default, offset +0.80v=idle 1.212v, prime95 1.188v.

looks like to me when the offset goes up or down on both settings so does the idle and load Vcore.


----------



## Jpmboy

renhanxue said:


> As far as I understand the load line settings, they control the slope of the, well, load line, or by how much the vcore drops with increasing current load on the CPU. To take an easily calculated example: at a hypothetical zero load (0 amperes going through the CPU), VID = vcore. Let's say that our hypothetical VID is fixed at 1.2v regardless of load. Now, if you have a load line setting of 1.0 milli-Ohm, then pushing 1 A of current through the CPU will give you 1 millivolt of vdroop, and we're getting a vcore of 1.199v. Pushing 50 A will give you 0.05v of vdroop, and we're getting a vcore of 1.15v. This is pretty much Ohm's law - V = I * R.
> 
> So far it would seem that setting a larger load line setting would just lead to more vdroop and you'd have to set the VID higher to get the same effective voltage. However, I think what's happening here is that these settings also affect how big the effect of the LLC setting is - with a higher load line setting, a given LLC setting would have to push the vcore up higher to get the same effect in practice. That would explain why I'm seeing a big overshoot with LLC 5 and load line at auto (presumably greater than 0.01) but not with load line at 0.01.
> 
> The BIOS documentation text by the way claims that the setting is in 1/100th of mOhms, which seems suspiciously small. Someone who is actually an expert at this, feel free to chime in. I'm essentially just reasoning from first principles here.


You're reasoning is correct.

With the more recent ASUS bioses, if you (can) select CPU SVID = "Best case scenario", you should be able to leave the Ac and DC load line settings on Auto. HOwever, if you are lucky enough to have a CPU that runs stable below the programmed VID for that frequency/load AND use adaptive voltage... neither of these OC toggles will lower the VID. The best strategy in this case is to run manual override (which "overrides" the VID stack) so you can run below the VID. Adaptive is "Additional" turbo voltage and really can't run below the VID. Using a negative offset (which lowers the vcore at all loads, including idle) can present a separate set of other issues. Lastly, vdroop is there for a reason, it is a good thing for any 24/7 overclock, and even at the edge, if one has to defeat droop in order to hold an overclock's voltage (a crash here will happen when the load ends due to a large undershoot), probably should rethink the OC. LLC is there to deal with the droop-mitigated voltage swing (read: microsecond spikes, called V_ovs in the processor's documentation) at load transitions, not voltage regulation/raising for steady load. These transition spikes are a basic property of current changes in voltage-clamped systems (eg, even adaptive is a voltage clamped system at a set load). Ideally a system should idle (windows high power plan, if using adaptive) at a higher vcore than when under load.


----------



## KedarWolf

I figured out how to use UbiTool to update an older BIOS to the latest 96 version microcode.

If anyone wants a how-to, let me know here. Better not to PM me, I'm horrible at checking messages there. But I'll answer you in PM.

Or I can just update the 1101 BIOS or the version for Asus for you you want and give you a link to it on my Google Drive. 

I got 4x8GB of G.Skill 3200 CL14 RamTest stable at 4300MHZ at 18-17-17-33 2T with the latest microcode on the 1101 BIOS and my CPU RealBench stable at 1.37v on load at 5.1GHZ core, 5.1GHZ cache.


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> I figured out how to use UbiTool to update an older BIOS to the latest 96 version microcode.
> 
> If anyone wants a how-to, let me know here. Better not to PM me, I'm horrible at checking messages there. But I'll answer you in PM.
> 
> Or I can just update the 1101 BIOS or the version for Asus for you you want and give you a link to it on my Google Drive.
> 
> I got 4x8GB of G.Skill 3200 CL14 RamTest stable at 4300MHZ at 18-17-17-33 2T with the latest microcode on the 1101 BIOS and my CPU RealBench stable at 1.37v on load at 5.1GHZ core, 5.1GHZ cache.



Good. Better to learn how to do it yourself!


----------



## lionc

If I'm concerned about long term CPU degradation on my Maximus X Hero, should I rather use 1.39V with LLC5 (0.032V droop at load) or 1.32V with LLC6 (0.032V negative droop at load)? Either setting is stable.


----------



## wingman99

lionc said:


> If I'm concerned about long term CPU degradation on my Maximus X Hero, should I rather use 1.39V with LLC5 (0.032V droop at load) or 1.32V with LLC6 (0.032V negative droop at load)? Either setting is stable.


Do they both arrive at the same Windows Vcore under load? If they do it does not matter. Load = increased AMPs


----------



## swddeluxx

KedarWolf said:


> I figured out how to use UbiTool to update an older BIOS to the latest 96 version microcode.
> 
> If anyone wants a how-to, let me know here. Better not to PM me, I'm horrible at checking messages there. But I'll answer you in PM.
> 
> Or I can just update the 1101 BIOS or the version for Asus for you you want and give you a link to it on my Google Drive.
> 
> I got 4x8GB of G.Skill 3200 CL14 RamTest stable at 4300MHZ at 18-17-17-33 2T with the latest microcode on the 1101 BIOS and my CPU RealBench stable at 1.37v on load at 5.1GHZ core, 5.1GHZ cache.



Hi Kedar 

can you make 1101 Bios + 0x94 microcode + latest IME firmware for ASUS Maximus X Hero Board? 
it were really nice, Please!


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> Hi Kedar
> 
> can you make 1101 Bios + 0x94 microcode + latest IME firmware for ASUS Maximus X Hero Board?
> it were really nice, Please!


You need to flash 1401 first with EZ Flash in the BIOS setup to get the IME update first, then flash 1101 after. Set BIOS at defaults before you do, good practice.

I have 1101 Hero Wi-fi with the 0x96 microcode, I'm using it currently but if you want 94, can do. 

Let me know, 96, the latest, or 94.

And need to know Hero or Hero Wi-Fi AC board?


----------



## Jpmboy

lionc said:


> If I'm concerned about long term CPU degradation on my Maximus X Hero, should I rather use 1.39V with LLC5 (0.032V droop at load) or 1.32V with LLC6 (0.032V negative droop at load)? Either setting is stable.


if LLC 6 is increasing vcore at load... use LLC 5 and allow for some healthy vdroop. :thumb:


----------



## KedarWolf

This is BIOS 1101 with the 0x96 version microcode firmware I modded it to, running it currently, but the info is from the actual BIOS file I flashed.



















Also, I confirmed if you flash 1401 with EZ Flash from booting into the BIOS to update the IMA firmware, then use USB Flashback to flash the microcode 0x96 1101 BIOS you keep the latest IME firmware from 1401.


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ where's the rep system!


----------



## swddeluxx

Hi Kedar 

my Board is ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero 

https://geizhals.eu/asus-rog-maximu....html?hloc=at&hloc=de&hloc=eu&hloc=pl&hloc=uk


if i will to go latest IME firmware too than i must flash 1401 first, Ok., but - if i do ONLY flashing with your 1101 Bios
it is bad?, do I really to have the last IMEI firmware or i can use your Bios without to flashing 1401 at first?


----------



## apw63

NEVERMIND I FIGURED IT OUT.

I know this has been posted before. But could someone remind me of how to export UEFI setting to a text file. I want to update my MXF to latest version. 

Thank you


----------



## swddeluxx

apw63 said:


> NEVERMIND I FIGURED IT OUT.
> 
> I know this has been posted before. But could someone remind me of how to export UEFI setting to a text file. I want to update my MXF to latest version.
> 
> Thank you


CTRL + F2 in Bios


----------



## Angantyr

I've just noticed today that the ROG STRIX Z370-F received a new Bios two days ago. But looking at the .2 description, I'm a little bit puzzled about its meaning.










Why would they mention that the bios now supports 8th gen processor, I mean, it seems redundant and just confuses me more than anything. What has changed?


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> You need to flash 1401 first with EZ Flash in the BIOS setup to get the IME update first, then flash 1101 after. Set BIOS at defaults before you do, good practice.
> 
> I have 1101 Hero Wi-fi with the 0x96 microcode, I'm using it currently but if you want 94, can do.
> 
> Let me know, 96, the latest, or 94.
> 
> And need to know Hero or Hero Wi-Fi AC board?


Hi Kedar,

I am wondering 2 things. Why does it matter if its Hero or Hero WIFI? And second, why are you doing this? Have you found a problem with BIOS 1401 that is not a problem in 1101? I am talking Hero WIFI.

I don't know how to mod the BIOS but if there is a compelling reason to use 1101 with 0x96 (or 0x94) microcode as opposed to just updating to 1401 with whatever microcode it comes with, then I may give it a go.

Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> Hi Kedar
> 
> my Board is ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero
> 
> https://geizhals.eu/asus-rog-maximu....html?hloc=at&hloc=de&hloc=eu&hloc=pl&hloc=uk
> 
> 
> if i will to go latest IME firmware too than i must flash 1401 first, Ok., but - if i do ONLY flashing with your 1101 Bios
> it is bad?, do I really to have the last IMEI firmware or i can use your Bios without to flashing 1401 at first?


You can use my BIOS without flashing the IME firmware by flashing 1401, no issues doing that, and if you do flash 1401, no way to go back to the old IME firmware I don't think.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/12ITAurSLeHgHbOLz5H0m8yDpOW4N4ous/view?usp=sharing

After you flash it run HWInfo Summary and check here. That's the newest microcode I modded the BIOS with. 

Oh, btw, that screenshot is from my Hero Wi-Fi AC PC, your BIOS is just the regular Hero.


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Hi Kedar,
> 
> I am wondering 2 things. Why does it matter if its Hero or Hero WIFI? And second, why are you doing this? Have you found a problem with BIOS 1401 that is not a problem in 1101? I am talking Hero WIFI.
> 
> I don't know how to mod the BIOS but if there is a compelling reason to use 1101 with 0x96 (or 0x94) microcode as opposed to just updating to 1401 with whatever microcode it comes with, then I may give it a go.
> 
> Thanks!


People have been getting a good stable overclock with 1101 where other BIOS's are not quite as good. 

Like on other platforms sometimes older BIOS's are just better. I know @Jpmboy for the longest time used an older BIOS on the X99 platform. But if you're happy with 1401, I would keep it.

If you want to try the Hero Wi-Fi AC 1101 with the 0x96 microcode, let me know. I'm using it now, see my screenshot in the previous post.

Wait, I'm confused. Wi-Fi AC will only work with that board.


----------



## VadimM

Is it possible to roll back to 2017 year bios after installing the latest one? Prime Z370-A


----------



## KedarWolf

You can USB Flashback an older BIOS but I don't think you can go back to the older IME firmware without modding your IMA firmware with third-party programs.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> People have been getting a good stable overclock with 1101 where other BIOS's are not quite as good.
> 
> Like on other platforms sometimes older BIOS's are just better. I know @Jpmboy for the longest time used an older BIOS on the X99 platform. But if you're happy with 1401, I would keep it.
> 
> If you want to try the Hero Wi-Fi AC 1101 with the 0x96 microcode, let me know. I'm using it now, see my screenshot in the previous post.
> 
> Wait, I'm confused. Wi-Fi AC will only work with that board.



That makes sense. I updated my board to Bios 1401 through the Bios EZ Flash utility with Internet option so I think the IME firmware update happened but I am not sure how to check it. HWINFO System Summary shows Bios 1401 and ucode 94, not 96. I am not sure what ucode was running before the update from 1101 to 1401 but it does not look like the 1401 update loaded ucode 96. Should I be seeing ucode 96 or am I confused? I took a screen shot of HWiNFO showing Bios 1401 and ucode 94 but I cannot for the life of me figure out how to insert or attach the png file to this post. Dragging it to "Drag and Drop File Upload" does not work and if I select Manage Attachments, then select the file and click Upload, it says Upload of File Failed. I don't know it its me or the forum. I give up.


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> That makes sense. I updated my board to Bios 1401 through the Bios EZ Flash utility with Internet option so I think the IME firmware update happened but I am not sure how to check it. HWINFO System Summary shows Bios 1401 and ucode 94, not 96. I am not sure what ucode was running before the update from 1101 to 1401 but it does not look like the 1401 update loaded ucode 96. Should I be seeing ucode 96 or am I confused? I took a screen shot of HWiNFO showing Bios 1401 and ucode 94 but I cannot for the life of me figure out how to insert or attach the png file to this post. Dragging it to "Drag and Drop File Upload" does not work and if I select Manage Attachments, then select the file and click Upload, it says Upload of File Failed. I don't know it its me or the forum. I give up.


I'm sure 1401 comes with microcode 94, not the latest 96. 

Yeah, I checked, it does.

It does have the latest IME though, I checked it.

Yeah, posting pics is messed up. I upload to Imgur, right click on the uploaded pic, 'Copy picture URL' and insert the URL with the 'Insert Image' option here.

If you really really want the 96 microcode I can mod the 1401 BIOS for you. 

Hero Wi-Fi AC, right?


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> I'm sure 1401 comes with microcode 94, not the latest 96.
> 
> Yeah, I checked, it does.
> 
> It does have the latest IME though, I checked it.
> 
> Yeah, posting pics is messed up. I upload to Imgur, right click on the uploaded pic, 'Copy picture URL' and insert the URL with the 'Insert Image' option here.
> 
> If you really really want the 96 microcode I can mod the 1401 BIOS for you.
> 
> Hero Wi-Fi AC, right?



1503 comes with 0x96


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> 1503 comes with 0x96


1503 not showing for Hero Wi-Fi AC on Asus site BUT if you right click on the 1401 download, Copy URL, paste into browser and change 1401 in the URL to 1503 you'll download it.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Yes please. Hero Wifi. I just recently flashed 1401 and have not even put in a baseline OC yet so it would be good too have 1401 with u code 96. 1401 was released recently. I wonder why they released it with ucode 94. The release notes say updated ucode. If you provide 1401 with ucode 96, I will have the option. 

As for MEI firmware, how do you check it? I checked the IMEI driver but that's different than the firmware. I did a quick Google but found either utilities that were years old that do nothing on this platform or Spectre/Meltdown protection checkers. 

As for posting or attaching image files, I can't believe they have this big Drag and Drop to Upload box and it doesn't work, and Manage Attachments also does not work!?!?! I just figured I was doing something wrong. Having to post your image to a third party site and inserting a link seems like a pretty circumtuitous and inconvenient route but I will give it a try. 

Anyway thank you in advance. Modding BIOSes (sp?) kind of got thrust into the spotlight during the Spectre/Meltdown panic. Some guys heavily into it and a lot of frustrated people with older generation platforms taking matters into their own hands and trying it for the first time. I played with it but was afraid I would brick my MOBO.


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Yes please. Hero Wifi. I just recently flashed 1401 and have not even put in a baseline OC yet so it would be good too have 1401 with u code 96. 1401 was released recently. I wonder why they released it with ucode 94. The release notes say updated ucode. If you provide 1401 with ucode 96, I will have the option.
> 
> As for MEI firmware, how do you check it? I checked the IMEI driver but that's different than the firmware. I did a quick Google but found either utilities that were years old that do nothing on this platform or Spectre/Meltdown protection checkers.
> 
> As for posting or attaching image files, I can't believe they have this big Drag and Drop to Upload box and it doesn't work, and Manage Attachments also does not work!?!?! I just figured I was doing something wrong. Having to post your image to a third party site and inserting a link seems like a pretty circumtuitous and inconvenient route but I will give it a try.
> 
> Anyway thank you in advance. Modding BIOSes (sp?) kind of got thrust into the spotlight during the Spectre/Meltdown panic. Some guys heavily into it and a lot of frustrated people with older generation platforms taking matters into their own hands and trying it for the first time. I played with it but was afraid I would brick my MOBO.


1503 not showing for Hero Wi-Fi AC on Asus site BUT if you right click on the 1401 download, Copy URL, paste into browser and change 1401 in the URL to 1503 you'll download it.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> 1503 not showing for Hero Wi-Fi AC on Asus site BUT if you right click on the 1401 download, Copy URL, paste into browser and change 1401 in the URL to 1503 you'll download it.


Huh. I am going to try that! Thx

Edit - it worked! And I did it on an iPad which was weird. I barely got started on 1401 and here comes 1503. I wonder what else is different other than the ucode. Also wonder if it's better than 1401 or 1101, which I had no problems with.


----------



## ArneR

*2. Support the latest 8th Gen Intel® Core™ Processor.*

What does this mean? My Maximus X Hero is running 1301, and supports the 8086k just fine as far as I can tell.


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Yes please. Hero Wifi. I just recently flashed 1401 and have not even put in a baseline OC yet so it would be good too have 1401 with u code 96. 1401 was released recently. I wonder why they released it with ucode 94. The release notes say updated ucode. If you provide 1401 with ucode 96, I will have the option.
> 
> As for MEI firmware, how do you check it? I checked the IMEI driver but that's different than the firmware. I did a quick Google but found either utilities that were years old that do nothing on this platform or Spectre/Meltdown protection checkers.
> 
> As for posting or attaching image files, I can't believe they have this big Drag and Drop to Upload box and it doesn't work, and Manage Attachments also does not work!?!?! I just figured I was doing something wrong. Having to post your image to a third party site and inserting a link seems like a pretty circumtuitous and inconvenient route but I will give it a try.
> 
> Anyway thank you in advance. Modding BIOSes (sp?) kind of got thrust into the spotlight during the Spectre/Meltdown panic. Some guys heavily into it and a lot of frustrated people with older generation platforms taking matters into their own hands and trying it for the first time. I played with it but was afraid I would brick my MOBO.


https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZlmAeUuzsFTxIHUptCdKt9jEnR7Mkf6F/view?usp=sharing 

Unzip file, put BIOS in same folder, right click, Run As Admin on the MEA.exe, type in name of BIOS, you get IME version. But it depends on the platform which is the latest, for an 8700k is the Intel CSME 11.8 Consumer PCH-LP Firmware v11.8.50.3470


----------



## swddeluxx

Asus Site is bugged, to downloading latest 1503 from Asus Motherboard Homepage you must choose Windows 7 64 Bit OS!! -- not Windows 10 64Bit! Then 1503 Bios show up for downloading


----------



## VadimM

KedarWolf said:


> You can USB Flashback an older BIOS but I don't think you can go back to the older IME firmware without modding your IMA firmware with third-party programs.


Thnx. The only thing about IME I know atm that it is the thing NSA spies on us through.
Wondering if 1101 Hero bios have Prime analogue. Date-wise it must be 0614...


----------



## GeneO

swddeluxx said:


> Asus Site is bugged, to downloading latest 1503 from Asus Motherboard Homepage you must choose Windows 7 64 Bit OS!! -- not Windows 10 64Bit! Then 1503 Bios show up for downloading /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


It is usually buggy, but I think they just haven't officially released it yet.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZlmAeUuzsFTxIHUptCdKt9jEnR7Mkf6F/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Unzip file, put BIOS in same folder, right click, Run As Admin on the MEA.exe, type in name of BIOS, you get IME version. But it depends on the platform which is the latest, for an 8700k is the Intel CSME 11.8 Consumer PCH-LP Firmware v11.8.50.3470


Thanks Kedar. That worked perfectly and Bios 1503 says exactly what you listed when I run MEA.exe on it. I am going to flash it now from a USB drive and see how it comes up. Thanks again!


----------



## SpeedyIV

swddeluxx said:


> Asus Site is bugged, to downloading latest 1503 from Asus Motherboard Homepage you must choose Windows 7 64 Bit OS!! -- not Windows 10 64Bit! Then 1503 Bios show up for downloading


Huh. When I go to the Asus site, for the Hero WIFI, I see Bios 1403 for any Windows operating system I select. Fort the Hero non-WIFI I see Bios 1503 mo natter what Windows operating system I select. I loaded 1503 on my Hero WIFI, and its showing ucode 96 and latest MEI firmware. Everything seems to work.


----------



## andyroo89

Hello everyone, its been a long time since I have logged into this sit. Been around for... 10 years though. 

This board I am considering on buying for my 8700k, but I am curious about ram, Last time I bought ram was DDR2, and idk what ram I have in my current rig (sig rig isn't updated, ignore that) I am wanting to do 32gb of ram, (video editing, and gaming for sure) what would you guys recommend?


----------



## wingman99

andyroo89 said:


> Hello everyone, its been a long time since I have logged into this sit. Been around for... 10 years though.
> 
> This board I am considering on buying for my 8700k, but I am curious about ram, Last time I bought ram was DDR2, and idk what ram I have in my current rig (sig rig isn't updated, ignore that) I am wanting to do 32gb of ram, (video editing, and gaming for sure) what would you guys recommend?


This is good ram for use and overclocking. LINK: http://www.gskill.com/en/finder?cat...ries=2482&prop_2=32GB+(16GBx2)&prop_3=3200MHz


----------



## andyroo89

wingman99 said:


> This is good ram for use and overclocking. LINK: http://www.gskill.com/en/finder?cat...ries=2482&prop_2=32GB+(16GBx2)&prop_3=3200MHz


Thanks man, man I need to brush up on my stuff. I am starting to fall into the old person that dont understand computers...


----------



## wingman99

andyroo89 said:


> Thanks man, man I need to brush up on my stuff. I am starting to fall into the old person that dont understand computers...


Here is a link that you can brush up on coffee lake DDR4 Performance scaling. LINK: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews...Memory_Performance_Benchmark_Analysis/10.html


----------



## KedarWolf

andyroo89 said:


> Thanks man, man I need to brush up on my stuff. I am starting to fall into the old person that dont understand computers...




http://www.gskill.com/en/finder?cat...ries=2482&prop_2=32GB+(16GBx2)&prop_3=3200MHz

This RAM is 2x16GB doubled sided RAM, doesn't overclock as well as 2x8GB or 4x8GB Trident Z CL14 3200. You want the latter. Some people do well with 2x8GB Trident Z 4400 too. And don't get RBG RAM, there are problems with it.


----------



## KedarWolf

If you're having troubling overclocking your RAM and have a dual screen setup and a screen on your iGPU and your graphics card, disable your iGPU in the BIOS and have both screens on your graphics card. :thumb:

If I have the iGPU enabled, not only do I need to set my cache at 4.9GHZ instead of 5.0GHZ to stop Windows from crashing but my RAM won't pass RamTest at 4300MHZ when it will with the iGPU disabled. :h34r-smi


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Ok, been away for a while, I'm back and going to build a new machine.

What's the ROG Strix Z370-G like for a M-ATX build, it'll be paired with a 8700k, was just going for a 4.5Ghz all core overclock (Will be delidded).
Anyone used the board and have any feedback.


----------



## feznz

schoolofmonkey said:


> Ok, been away for a while, I'm back and going to build a new machine.
> 
> What's the ROG Strix Z370-G like for a M-ATX build, it'll be paired with a 8700k, was just going for a 4.5Ghz all core overclock (Will be delidded).
> Anyone used the board and have any feedback.


TBH why would you delid for 4.5Ghz and almost any board would be adequate for this mild OC


----------



## schoolofmonkey

feznz said:


> TBH why would you delid for 4.5Ghz and almost any board would be adequate for this mild OC


Because it's me, I didn't buy the Der8auer delid kit for nothing :thumb:

Changed my mind after this post now anyway, I can pickup a Apex for the same price as a Hero so I'm just going to do that.


----------



## KedarWolf

schoolofmonkey said:


> Because it's me, I didn't buy the Der8auer delid kit for nothing :thumb:
> 
> Changed my mind after this post now anyway, I can pickup a Apex for the same price as a Hero so I'm just going to do that.


If you're getting the Apex, 2x8GB Trident Z CL14 3200, 2x8GB Trident Z CL15 3600 or 2x8GB Trident Z 4400 is the way to go. :h34r-smi

@Jpmboy Who pretty much the go-to guy here swears by the CL15 3600. :thumb:

2x16GB if you're overclocking our RAM is double-sided and doesn't do near as well as these single-sided kits.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

KedarWolf said:


> If you're getting the Apex, 2x8GB Trident Z CL14 3200, 2x8GB Trident Z CL15 3600 or 2x8GB Trident Z 4400 is the way to go. :h34r-smi
> 
> @Jpmboy Who pretty much the go-to guy here swears by the CL15 3600. :thumb:
> 
> 2x16GB if you're overclocking our RAM is double-sided and doesn't do near as well as these single-sided kits.


JP knows me well, he'll get the "because it's me" comment I made before.
I've been tossing up with ram, I don't know much about Team T-Force Dark, it's meant to be Samsung B-Die's as well.

I'm just building a second gaming machine, wasn't really going to be for overclocking, I already know what my current 8700k can do (really average), so I'll see what the new chip can do and pick the best for the overclocking machine, then use the other for a gaming/whatever machine.
Probably won't delid the new 8700k for at least a week to make sure it's running fine.


----------



## encrypted11

GeneO said:


> Yeah, I am struggling with 1401. My 5 GHz was stable at 1.376v on 1101, but 1401 I get WHEA errors (correctable) even at 1.396v. I hope it is not the fault of the IME update, as I don't know how to roll that back.


Your chip could require abit more juice in PLL bandwidth past its initial "break in" especially on higher current loads.


----------



## swddeluxx

KedarWolf said:


> You can use my BIOS without flashing the IME firmware by flashing 1401, no issues doing that, and if you do flash 1401, no way to go back to the old IME firmware I don't think.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/12ITAurSLeHgHbOLz5H0m8yDpOW4N4ous/view?usp=sharing
> 
> After you flash it run HWInfo Summary and check here. That's the newest microcode I modded the BIOS with.
> 
> Oh, btw, that screenshot is from my Hero Wi-Fi AC PC, your BIOS is just the regular Hero.



Many Thanks Bro! 

my Board running very well with your Bios with 5.2/5.0/4133 !


----------



## gammagoat

encrypted11 said:


> Your chip could require abit more juice in PLL bandwidth past its initial "break in" especially on higher current loads.


I'm kinda in a similar situation. How high can we go with this voltage, I've bumped it up one notch already its at 1.168 now.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> If you're having troubling overclocking your RAM and have a dual screen setup and a screen on your iGPU and your graphics card, disable your iGPU in the BIOS and have both screens on your graphics card. :thumb:
> 
> If I have the iGPU enabled, not only do I need to set my cache at 4.9GHZ instead of 5.0GHZ to stop Windows from crashing but my RAM won't pass RamTest at 4300MHZ when it will with the iGPU disabled. :h34r-smi


Hmmm. That is interesting. Coming from X99, one of the things I liked about the 8700k is the iGPU. I am not picky about video quality, high frame rates, etc, and don't need all the headaches that come with multiple GPU setups. 1920 x 1080 @30FPS is fine with me, but I do like multiple monitors - 4 on my Z370 rig and 6 on my X99 rig. The 6 monitor rig is cludged together with 2 different GPUs (one AMD, one NVIDIA), and a few cheapo USB - DVI video adaptors (which work surprisingly well).

So on my Z370 rig, I was happy to enable the iGPU and only added a "real" GPU to drive more displays. Another goal of the Z370 build was to do better with RAM OC. I had limited success on X99 but that has 32G (4 x 8G GSkill F4-3333C16Q-GTZB, E-Die) which I could never get to boot at anything over 3000MHz. So for the Z370 build I got a 2 x 8G GSkill F4-3200Ci14D-16GTZR B-Die kit, which I promptly dialed up to 3200 MHz, HCL and GSAT stable. Yeah it's LED RAM, which was a concern, but it hit 3200MHz easily. Of course now people are running RAM WAY faster than that so I guess it's not much of an accomplishment. 

I have not noticed any cache or RAM OC limitations due to the iGPU being enabled, but I guess I am not pushing the rig hard enough to encounter these effects. If I decide to push it to the edge, I guess I will have to disable the iGPU. Thanks for the tip.


----------



## encrypted11

gammagoat said:


> I'm kinda in a similar situation. How high can we go with this voltage, I've bumped it up one notch already its at 1.168 now.


ASRock defaults with PLL Bandwidth at 1.2V with any OC tuning. Its reference value of 1V isn't something most board makers don't seem to adhere with. MSi was defaulting with 1.2V as well IIRC. On Intel's datasheet, if I remembered correctly it could be pegged to Vddq out of the box based on the footnotes (a DRAM IC related voltage).

My 5.3ghz 8700K ran the minimum value 1.1v VccPLL (PLL bandwidth) on my current board with excellent bench stable core voltages. Shortly after my rookie rumble #52 shootout (that also included an XTU run without power limits at 1.424v likely around 300W package power) and many 1.4V+ benchmark runs I ran the chip quickly to its steady state that was 20mV above the minimum value with no increase in vcore.

It held up well and hasn't asked for more voltages since. So if you love crunching primes or anything of that vigor, you'd probably be running your chip to "break in" really quick PLL Bandwith Level 4 (~1.15V) could yield potential oc stability benefits.

My personal observations and ramblings anyway.


----------



## GeneO

encrypted11 said:


> Your chip could require abit more juice in PLL bandwidth past its initial "break in" especially on higher current loads.



I resolved this with more vdroop (decreasing my load line slope) and more adaptive volts, so I still had 1,376 under load, upped DMI voltage one notch and increased CPU PLL from 1.1 to 1.15v (it defaults to 1.2v on my board as well, but used to be stable at 1.1v with BIOS 1101). The load line slope change got me most of the way there. I am not sure which of the latter two got me the rest of the way. In any case, no correctable WHEA errors after 4 hours of Realbench 2.43 stress.


Anyhow, did this before I saw your post so we thought along same lines - I started twiddling with these when I noticed going from ring 47x to 46x improved the situation.


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> Many Thanks Bro!
> 
> my Board running very well with your Bios with 5.2/5.0/4133 !


You might want to try 1503, I'm getting good results with it and it has the latest microcode.

Scroll up with my instruction on how to hack the URL to get it, I don't think it's showing on the Asus website.

Just know if you do though, you won't be able to go back to the older IME.


----------



## KedarWolf

Hey peeps, more VCCIO, System Agent Voltage and RAM voltage is NOT always better.

I never got 4x8GB G.Skill CL14 3200 4300MHZ GSAT stable until I lowered RAM voltage from 4.5v to 4.4v and VCCIO and System Agent from 1.2375v and 1.25v to 1.225 and 1.225.

Here are my timings. 

Gonna edit those pics, too big, brb,


----------



## Daydreaming

On the Hero X (not wifi) should I update from bios 1401 (94) to 1503? What is the benefit it anything..... And if I do that does it mean I have to enter all my OC settings again manually, Including RAM timings and so on?


----------



## swddeluxx

KedarWolf said:


> You might want to try 1503, I'm getting good results with it and it has the latest microcode.
> 
> Scroll up with my instruction on how to hack the URL to get it, I don't think it's showing on the Asus website.
> 
> Just know if you do though, you won't be able to go back to the older IME.


Thanks again bro, but i will stay with your good 1101 Bios(with older IME  ).

There Asus Download Links for all Z370 Motherboards:

ROG MAXIMUS X HERO : http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb...1.1064048509.1530223150-1410932282.1525539863

ROG MAXIMUS X HERO (WI-FI AC) : 
http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb...7.1064048509.1530223150-1410932282.1525539863

ROG MAXIMUS X CODE : http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb...5.1064048509.1530223150-1410932282.1525539863

ROG MAXIMUS X FORMULA : http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb...3.1064048509.1530223150-1410932282.1525539863

ROG MAXIMUS X APEX : http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb...3.1064048509.1530223150-1410932282.1525539863

Happy Testing bros


----------



## KedarWolf

Daydreaming said:


> On the Hero X (not wifi) should I update from bios 1401 (94) to 1503? What is the benefit it anything..... And if I do that does it mean I have to enter all my OC settings again manually, Including RAM timings and so on?


Yes, you would have to apply all your overclock settings again.

Newer microcode usually means a bit better performance gains.


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> Newer microcode usually means a bit better performance gains.



Disagree. I think it usually means fixing bugs often lessens performance. In this case they are probably fixing bugs in their Spectre patches they made in 0x94 microcode. And if you enable the OS code that uses those patches, you will get big performance hits in certain areas. I have never upgraded microcode expecting a performance gain and I have never experience any gains


----------



## wingman99

GeneO said:


> Disagree. I think it usually means fixing bugs often lessens performance. In this case they are probably fixing bugs in their Spectre patches they made in 0x94 microcode. And if you enable the OS code that uses those patches, you will get big performance hits in certain areas. I have never upgraded microcode expecting a performance gain and I have never experience any gains


Then why does some ASUS BIOS updates say improve system performance?


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> Disagree. I think it usually means fixing bugs often lessens performance. In this case they are probably fixing bugs in their Spectre patches they made in 0x94 microcode. And if you enable the OS code that uses those patches, you will get big performance hits in certain areas. I have never upgraded microcode expecting a performance gain and I have never experience any gains



I'm pretty sure I read they improved the performance somewhat of the Spectre fixes since the original fix. Like the fix in 1101 affects performance more than later fixes.


----------



## GeneO

wingman99 said:


> Then why does some ASUS BIOS updates say improve system performance?





Because they always say that. Also changes to the BIOS are not the same as microcode updates. That is why there are listed separately. Changes to the BIOS can improve performance independent of the microcode. ASUS are not going to make any claims about the microcode as that is an Intel thing - they won't tell you anything about the microcode except it is updated.


BTW, improved performance can mean a lot of things. Fir instance, they may have improved memory training for better RAM performance. Or it could mean nothing whatsoever.


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> I'm pretty sure I read they improved the performance somewhat of the Spectre fixes since the original fix. Like the fix in 1101 affects performance more than later fixes.



Sure, they may have done that. But if you enable the fix in the OS, it is still an overall significant performance hit. But I don;t know how you would know that - I haven't even seen 96 released in official Intel Linux microcode yet. I wonder id it ever will. Certainly no release notes.


----------



## encrypted11

Newer microcodes also mean workarounds for newer documented logic errors / erratums aside from mitigations.
BIOS change logs have mostly been cryptic and nebulous anyway.


----------



## GAN77

A new bios 1503 includes a microcode for eight-core processors. Intel makes a "gift"?))


----------



## encrypted11

GAN77 said:


> A new bios 1503 includes a microcode for eight-core processors. Intel makes a "gift"?))



Is it a meltdown fixed hex core or octacore?

906EC


----------



## GAN77

encrypted11 said:


> Is it a meltdown fixed hex core or octacore?
> 
> 906EC


I do not know the exact answer.


----------



## Daydreaming

Does anyone know how to fix this "unknown device" ASMedia USB 3.1 eXtensible Host Controller on the X Hero with Windows 10 pro. 

The windows auto driver update doesn't find anything and nor does driver booster. I don't know what exactly it is that is missing...


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Daydreaming said:


> Does anyone know how to fix this "unknown device" ASMedia USB 3.1 eXtensible Host Controller on the X Hero with Windows 10 pro.
> 
> The windows auto driver update doesn't find anything and nor does driver booster. I don't know what exactly it is that is missing...


Stick your motherboard driver cd in and load browse update driver from there.


----------



## Daydreaming

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Stick your motherboard driver cd in and load browse update driver from there.


It just searches the CD for a while and then tells me "Windows could not find drivers for your device"


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Try using this driver:

*http://drivers.softpedia.com/get/MO...X-Hero-ASMedia-USB-3-1-Driver-1-16-38-1.shtml*


Looked some more, found this:

*https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=asmedia*

Hit the "last updated" tab, then it's the fifth one down from the top you want to download.


----------



## encrypted11

GAN77 said:


> A new bios 1503 includes a microcode for eight-core processors. Intel makes a "gift"?))



Looks like 906EC isn't the refreshed hex core.
https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/sa00115-microcode-update-guidance.pdf


----------



## wingman99

encrypted11 said:


> Looks like 906EC isn't the refreshed hex core.
> https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/sa00115-microcode-update-guidance.pdf


The link goes to oops page.


----------



## bee144

wingman99 said:


> encrypted11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like 906EC isn't the refreshed hex core.
> https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/sa00115-microcode-update-guidance.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> The link goes to oops page.
Click to expand...

The doc referenced 9000 series cpus. Intel likely pulled the doc.


----------



## SpeedyIV

GeneO said:


> Disagree. I think it usually means fixing bugs often lessens performance. In this case they are probably fixing bugs in their Spectre patches they made in 0x94 microcode. And if you enable the OS code that uses those patches, you will get big performance hits in certain areas. I have never upgraded microcode expecting a performance gain and I have never experience any gains


I understand what you are saying about updated ucode not necessarily increasing performance, and quite possibly decreasing it due to Spectre/Meltdown patches, but I don't understand what you mean by "And if you enable the OS code that uses those patches...". I thought the ucode just did it's thing and there was no user OS action required for it to do so. So if I load Bios 1503 with ucode 096 onto my HeroMax X (wifi), are you saying that the ucode patches are not activated unless I do something in Windows? Can you explain what you mean by this?

Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> I understand what you are saying about updated ucode not necessarily increasing performance, and quite possibly decreasing it due to Spectre/Meltdown patches, but I don't understand what you mean by "And if you enable the OS code that uses those patches...". I thought the ucode just did it's thing and there was no user OS action required for it to do so. So if I load Bios 1503 with ucode 096 onto my HeroMax X (wifi), are you saying that the ucode patches are not activated unless I do something in Windows? Can you explain what you mean by this?
> 
> Thanks!


If your Windows 10 is up to date you should be fine, but there were Windows updates for Spectre etc.


----------



## GeneO

SpeedyIV said:


> I understand what you are saying about updated ucode not necessarily increasing performance, and quite possibly decreasing it due to Spectre/Meltdown patches, but I don't understand what you mean by "And if you enable the OS code that uses those patches...". I thought the ucode just did it's thing and there was no user OS action required for it to do so. So if I load Bios 1503 with ucode 096 onto my HeroMax X (wifi), are you saying that the ucode patches are not activated unless I do something in Windows? Can you explain what you mean by this?
> 
> Thanks!



The microcode makes available some new functions for the OS to call in order to implement the Spectre patch. With the OS Spectre code enabled, there is a significant impact on performance in some areas. The impact is mainly due to these new microcode calls, which are necessary to protect against Spectre. You can disable the Windows Spectre code patch and it will therefore not call these functions and there is no performance impact, but you are no longer protected from Spectre with this OS code disabled. You can disable them through two registry entries. The latest Windows Spectre patch, which requires 0x94 or 0x96 microcode, is disabled by default and must explicitly be enabled. Previous OS patches for earlier Spectre variants are on by default.


----------



## GAN77

wingman99 said:


> The link goes to oops page.


microcode revision guidance
July 3 2018


----------



## wingman99

GAN77 said:


> microcode revision guidance
> July 3 2018


Thanks for the information.


----------



## GAN77

wingman99 said:


> Thanks for the information.


New microcode revision guidance does not contain CPUID 906EC, it officially does not exist)
The guys from overclockers.ru say that the 906EC updated the revision to Mc 0x96.
New_cpu906EC_plat22_ver00000096_2018-05-08_PRD_9EF46607

https://forums.overclockers.ru/viewtopic.php?p=15653493#p15653493

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1m_BRaCl070wcOrBzzHDEvDk9qmmG_A2r/view


----------



## SpeedyIV

GeneO said:


> The microcode makes available some new functions for the OS to call in order to implement the Spectre patch. With the OS Spectre code enabled, there is a significant impact on performance in some areas. The impact is mainly due to these new microcode calls, which are necessary to protect against Spectre. You can disable the Windows Spectre code patch and it will therefore not call these functions and there is no performance impact, but you are no longer protected from Spectre with this OS code disabled. You can disable them through two registry entries. The latest Windows Spectre patch, which requires 0x94 or 0x96 microcode, is disabled by default and must explicitly be enabled. Previous OS patches for earlier Spectre variants are on by default.


Thank you for the explanation. Makes sense. I Googled this a bit and found MS released and out of band update patch KB 4078130 that appears to install the 2 keys in the Registry. I did not have them, backed up the Registry, ran that patch, and now I do have them. My system shows Spectre and Meltdown protected using INSpectre Inspector and the Ashampoo SpectreMeltdown utility. I installed patches and ran these back when everyone was in a panic. TBH, I have not observed any significant loss of performance. My M.2 drive is a fast as ever, and various benchmarks have not changed significantly. Then again, with 2 or 3 BIOS updates and many Windows updates since my baselines, there are so many variables that unless I get into turning the patches on and off and hunting for differences, I am inclined to just leave it as it is. I understand that none of these spectre/meltdown patches are going to improve anything (except maybe security). Thanks !


----------



## MonarchX

I got my ASUS Hero X a few days ago and so far it's great, but when I use XMP and Auto for voltage, the board assigns my CPU 1.36v. Isn't that a bit too much? I have both Spread Spectrum (DRAM and Bus, I think), C-States, SpeedStep, that SVD thing - all disabled, and both CPU ratio (all cores in sync) and cache set to 4.8Ghz. Temps with Cryorig Universal R1 Dual Tower are great, but that 1.36v looks a bit high compared to what I see in other people's signature for similar rigs.

I am also confused about the use of M.2 NVMe SSD (set to 4x and PCI E only) along with SATA SSD in SATA1. Some say they both share bandwidth, but the manual says that only SATA5 and SATA6 do, thus to get full NVMe PCI E bandwidth, SATA1 with another SSD can be used along with it.


----------



## wingman99

*TA*



MonarchX said:


> I got my ASUS Hero X a few days ago and so far it's great, but when I use XMP and Auto for voltage, the board assigns my CPU 1.36v. Isn't that a bit too much? I have both Spread Spectrum (DRAM and Bus, I think), C-States, SpeedStep, that SVD thing - all disabled, and both CPU ratio (all cores in sync) and cache set to 4.8Ghz. Temps with Cryorig Universal R1 Dual Tower are great, but that 1.36v looks a bit high compared to what I see in other people's signature for similar rigs.
> 
> I am also confused about the use of M.2 NVMe SSD (set to 4x and PCI E only) along with SATA SSD in SATA1. Some say they both share bandwidth, but the manual says that only SATA5 and SATA6 do, thus to get full NVMe PCI E bandwidth, SATA1 with another SSD can be used along with it.


XMP sets memory to 1.36v and that is just fine. M.2 NVMe SSD use will disable SATA ports, refer to the manual for disabled ports using M.2 NVMe SSD.


----------



## MonarchX

wingman99 said:


> XMP sets memory to 1.36v and that is just fine. M.2 NVMe SSD use will disable SATA ports, refer to the manual for disabled ports using M.2 NVMe SSD.


To be honest, manual is too vague... It does not state specifically whether SATA port 1 can be used with NVMe PCI E 4x at the same time with full bandwidth for each... It just says that SATA ports 5 and 6 are disabled when M.2 is used.


----------



## wingman99

MonarchX said:


> To be honest, manual is too vague... It does not state specifically whether SATA port 1 can be used with NVMe PCI E 4x at the same time with full bandwidth for each... It just says that SATA ports 5 and 6 are disabled when M.2 is used.


Using a NVMe PCI E 4X does not restrict the bandwidth of any ports, it disables sata ports according to the manual.

Page X in the manual.


----------



## KedarWolf

MonarchX said:


> I got my ASUS Hero X a few days ago and so far it's great, but when I use XMP and Auto for voltage, the board assigns my CPU 1.36v. Isn't that a bit too much? I have both Spread Spectrum (DRAM and Bus, I think), C-States, SpeedStep, that SVD thing - all disabled, and both CPU ratio (all cores in sync) and cache set to 4.8Ghz. Temps with Cryorig Universal R1 Dual Tower are great, but that 1.36v looks a bit high compared to what I see in other people's signature for similar rigs.
> 
> I am also confused about the use of M.2 NVMe SSD (set to 4x and PCI E only) along with SATA SSD in SATA1. Some say they both share bandwidth, but the manual says that only SATA5 and SATA6 do, thus to get full NVMe PCI E bandwidth, SATA1 with another SSD can be used along with it.


It's generally accepted newer b-die RAM is good up to 1.45v for overclocking and every day use.


----------



## MonarchX

No, I meant that motherboard set CPU voltage to 1.36v, not RAM, which is also at about 1.35v.


----------



## KedarWolf

MonarchX said:


> No, I meant that motherboard set CPU voltage to 1.36v, not RAM, which is also at about 1.35v.


CPU voltage I would say up to 1.35v under air, max 1.4v under water or a decent CPU AIO. :h34r-smi

Test is staying under 80C while stress testing with RealBench, preferably under 75C f you can. :thumb:


----------



## VadimM

*MonarchX*
First thing we (on another forum) recommend with asus boards is to check/lower if needed VCCIO/VCCSA and set IA AC Load Line/IA DC Load Line to 0.01.
Mb often sets too high VCCIO/VCCSA with XMP on.


----------



## KeY0Ke

Gotten my Asus Maximus X Hero on latest bios 1503. 1401 having some issues on my board partly related to the rgb rams i have with post code 55

After all the rgb dillemma i am having (difficulty to overclock), have decided to get the 4266mhz cl19 1.4v kit: F4-4266C19D-16GTZSW (bought 2 kits as i require 32gb ram)

Also gotten a 8086k as previous 8700k is having difficult clocking 5ghz, i can only reach 1.38v 4.9ghz. 

IMC on the 8086k is much better then on my 8700k. @encrypted11 lend me the exact same kit (1 kit) and the IMC on 8700k is having difficulty cold booting until we reached SA 1.2125V and IO 1.175V.

IMC on the 8086k requires SA 1.15V and IO 1.075V to cold boot all 4 dimms at 1.4V 4000mhz CL16-17-17-38 gsat stable 2 hours


----------



## fvbarc

another new rog strix z370-f bios; 1002, mah


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm pretty sure any board you can do this to get the latest BIOS even if it's not showing on the support page.

Right click on the 1401 BIOS download link or 0805 or 0809 BIOS download link on Asus support page, 'Copy link address', paste into browser, change the 1401 to 1503 or 0805 to 0809 on other boards, 0809 to 1002 on a few others, profit!! 

I tested this on ROG MAXIMUS X FORMULA, ROG MAXIMUS X HERO (WI-FI AC), ROG STRIX Z370-F GAMING and ROG STRIX Z370-G GAMING (WI-FI AC), got the newest BIOS for all. :h34r-smi


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> I'm pretty sure any board you can do this to get the latest BIOS even if it's not showing on the support page.
> 
> Right click on the 1401 BIOS download link or 0805 or 0809 BIOS download link on Asus support page, 'Copy link address', paste into browser, change the 1401 to 1503 or 0805 to 0809 on other boards, 0809 to 1002 on a few others, profit!!
> 
> I tested this on ROG MAXIMUS X FORMULA, ROG MAXIMUS X HERO (WI-FI AC), ROG STRIX Z370-F GAMING and ROG STRIX Z370-G GAMING (WI-FI AC), got the newest BIOS for all. :h34r-smi


Kedar - You are Da MAN because that worked for me! Asus support page for Maximus X Hero (wifi) still does not show BIOS 1503 in the pulldown. I got it by doing what you described but I wonder why Asus has not "officially" released it (or all those others you checked)?


----------



## fireedo

well maximus X Apex also has 1503 BIOS using this trick  ... any information about this 1503 BIOS version?


----------



## GAN77

fvbarc said:


> another new rog strix z370-f bios; 1002, mah


Has the latest microcode CPUID 906EC 0x96


----------



## GAN77

SpeedyIV said:


> Kedar - You are Da MAN because that worked for me! Asus support page for Maximus X Hero (wifi) still does not show BIOS 1503 in the pulldown. I got it by doing what you described but I wonder why Asus has not "officially" released it (or all those others you checked)?


Perhaps because of the old microcode?


----------



## GAN77

fireedo said:


> well maximus X Apex also has 1503 BIOS using this trick  ... any information about this 1503 BIOS version?


Сontains the old CPUID 906EC 0x84


----------



## MonarchX

Does anyone know why Intel MEI latest update cannot detect my ASUS Hero X WiFi as supported platform? I did select correct 1.5M firmware...


----------



## KedarWolf

MonarchX said:


> Does anyone know why Intel MEI latest update cannot detect my ASUS Hero X WiFi as supported platform? I did select correct 1.5M firmware...


The latest update isn't the latest version, it's platform specific. The latest IME Firmware for Z370 is Intel CSME 11.8 Consumer PCH-LP Firmware v11.8.50.3470

https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html

Edit: Correct drivers are at that link as well.


----------



## KedarWolf

fireedo said:


> well maximus X Apex also has 1503 BIOS using this trick  ... any information about this 1503 BIOS version?


1503 Maximus X Apex BIOS has the latest 96 revision microcode.


----------



## KedarWolf

MonarchX said:


> Does anyone know why Intel MEI latest update cannot detect my ASUS Hero X WiFi as supported platform? I did select correct 1.5M firmware...


Intel CSME 11.8 Consumer PCH-H Firmware v11.8.50.3474 You can flash this firmware as well on that board. The first one is a low power, this one high performance.

I have the exact same board and it flashed fine.


----------



## MonarchX

This OC stuff on 8700K is confusing as hell to me. Witcher 3 is CPU intensive and with my setup temps stay below 45C, clock stays at 4.8Ghz, voltage (Auto) is at 1.36v. If I launch the latest Prime95 and perform a stress test, voltage sky-rockets to 1.5, and CPU reaches 100C in seconds, then downclocks itself to 3100Mhz... WTH??? Is that normal?

BTW, how did you flash MEI exactly? I get this "Error 82: Unknown or unsupported hardware platform".


----------



## wingman99

MonarchX said:


> This OC stuff on 8700K is confusing as hell to me. Witcher 3 is CPU intensive and with my setup temps stay below 45C, clock stays at 4.8Ghz, voltage (Auto) is at 1.36v. If I launch the latest Prime95 and perform a stress test, voltage sky-rockets to 1.5, and CPU reaches 100C in seconds, then downclocks itself to 3100Mhz... WTH??? Is that normal?
> 
> BTW, how did you flash MEI exactly? I get this "Error 82: Unknown or unsupported hardware platform".


The Processor will throttle at 100c to prevent internal damage. I would try to keep the temperate under 95c sometimes my temperature spikes to 96c and that is fine. What are your BIOS settings for overclock? If you have the Vcore on AUTO the core voltages is dynamic with load and clock speed according to processor VID table and motherboard manufacture calibration. ASUS Dynamic Vcore calibration is very high compared to Gigabyte.


----------



## bee144

Two questions... 

1. How do you flash the Intel CSME 11.8 Consumer PCH-H Firmware v11.8.50.3474?
1a. Device Manager shows 11.7.0.1057 Programs and Features shows 11.7.0.1067 and BIOS shows 11.8.50.3470

2.My AURA LEDs stop their activity every so often. Only way to regain control of them is to reboot the computer. I'm using Aura 1.06.17


----------



## Jpmboy

bee144 said:


> Two questions...
> 
> 1. How do you flash the Intel CSME 11.8 Consumer PCH-H Firmware v11.8.50.3474?
> 1a. Device Manager shows 11.7.0.1057 Programs and Features shows 11.7.0.1067 and BIOS shows 11.8.50.3470
> 
> 2.My AURA LEDs stop their activity every so often. Only way to regain control of them is to reboot the computer. I'm using Aura 1.06.17


1a. windows will run a new or "necessary" ME overriding the bios version (after OS hand-off). that's quite common since the vast majority of PCs out there never get flashed after they leave the factory. 

2. load the most recent version and set the lighting control in bios to default settings... avoid any control clash.


----------



## bl4ckdot

My Formula OLED Livedash is randomly (not) working. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't ... After each cold boot, it just decides to works or not.
I still have my issue about the fan on PCH 3 connectors randomly speeding up very fast for about 0.5 second.


----------



## CRJ84

How did you flash it?


----------



## CRJ84

KedarWolf said:


> Intel CSME 11.8 Consumer PCH-H Firmware v11.8.50.3474 You can flash this firmware as well on that board. The first one is a low power, this one high performance.
> 
> I have the exact same board and it flashed fine.


How did you flash it?


----------



## KedarWolf

CRJ84 said:


> How did you flash it?


Everything is found here.

https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html

Downloaded the firmware here.

https://mega.nz/#!mQtiEKQI!Fq95JvbTUhdE6J4TP6dOMtL2i957eOADQ8S-D5yE6J0

Downloaded the system tools here.

https://mega.nz/#!CVtyHIjZ!Rwc_BxF8GbVe2Qf6FQP0Aja8ItZNbqSw34m4tyu_wOU

Open an admin command prompt in C:\User\UserName\Downloads\Intel CSME System Tools v11 r12\Intel CSME System Tools v11 r12\FWUpdate\WIN64 or in the folder you downloaded it to

and run 'FWUpdLcl64.exe -F 11.8.50.3474_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin' without the quotation marks. 

Profit!!


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

KedarWolf

*Thx man for the info!*


----------



## CRJ84

Thank you KedarWolf  succes!


----------



## MonarchX

wingman99 said:


> The Processor will throttle at 100c to prevent internal damage. I would try to keep the temperate under 95c sometimes my temperature spikes to 96c and that is fine. What are your BIOS settings for overclock? If you have the Vcore on AUTO the core voltages is dynamic with load and clock speed according to processor VID table and motherboard manufacture calibration. ASUS Dynamic Vcore calibration is very high compared to Gigabyte.


I am not sure which settings to report. It would be nice if there was a way to EXPORT BIOS/UEFI configurations...


----------



## wingman99

MonarchX said:


> I am not sure which settings to report. It would be nice if there was a way to EXPORT BIOS/UEFI configurations...


What are the settings you changed from default?


----------



## bl4ckdot

What do you gain by flashing the latest Intel ME ? I'm quite curious


----------



## MonarchX

wingman99 said:


> MonarchX said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am not sure which settings to report. It would be nice if there was a way to EXPORT BIOS/UEFI configurations...
> 
> 
> 
> What are the settings you changed from default?
Click to expand...

That's almost like asking the same exact question... I set RAM to XMP, set all cores sync 48x, cache 48x, disabled the 2 spread spectrum settings, set RAM to 1T, disabled SpeedStep and as far as related CPU stuff goes, I think that was it. 

I am bothered by why Prime95 makes CPU so damn hot so fast? If it's the voltage of 1.5v that does it, then it can be controlled, but it seemed as if 8700K was not capable of sustaining it's default clock of 3700Mhz! That, to me, is a faulty CPU... It's rated to run at 3.7Ghz at all times with stock cooling, is it not?


----------



## gammagoat

MonarchX said:


> That's almost like asking the same exact question... I set RAM to XMP, set all cores sync 48x, cache 48x, disabled the 2 spread spectrum settings, set RAM to 1T, disabled SpeedStep and as far as related CPU stuff goes, I think that was it.
> 
> I am bothered by why Prime95 makes CPU so damn hot so fast? If it's the voltage of 1.5v that does it, then it can be controlled, but it seemed as if 8700K was not capable of sustaining it's default clock of 3700Mhz! That, to me, is a faulty CPU... It's rated to run at 3.7Ghz at all times with stock cooling, is it not?


What stock cooling? 8700K comes with no cooler at all.

1.5vcore will definitely make cpu run hot, I've run mine at that vcore to get to 5.1, but I am on custom loop. The R1 you are using doesn't stand a chance of cooling that cpu at that vcore.

What version of Prime95, AVX gonna heat things up.


----------



## Jpmboy

MonarchX said:


> That's almost like asking the same exact question... I set RAM to XMP, set all cores sync 48x, cache 48x, disabled the 2 spread spectrum settings, set RAM to 1T, disabled SpeedStep and as far as related CPU stuff goes, I think that was it.
> 
> I am bothered by why Prime95 makes CPU so damn hot so fast? If it's the voltage of 1.5v that does it, then it can be controlled, but it seemed as if 8700K was not capable of sustaining it's default clock of 3700Mhz! That, to me, is a faulty CPU...* It's rated to run at 3.7Ghz at all times with stock cooling,* is it not?


it's rated to run higher on a per-core basis. Read the guide in my sig.
You can create a txt file of all bios settings from bios. Nav to the ASUS Profiles manu, put a fat32 formatted USB stick in any port, scroll down to the usb stick in the menu and hit crtl-F2. a xtx file of all bios settings will be dropped to th estick.


if I read your post correctly... you set 48/48 and left vcore on Auto??


----------



## wingman99

MonarchX said:


> That's almost like asking the same exact question... I set RAM to XMP, set all cores sync 48x, cache 48x, disabled the 2 spread spectrum settings, set RAM to 1T, disabled SpeedStep and as far as related CPU stuff goes, I think that was it.
> 
> I am bothered by why Prime95 makes CPU so damn hot so fast? If it's the voltage of 1.5v that does it, then it can be controlled, but it seemed as if 8700K was not capable of sustaining it's default clock of 3700Mhz! That, to me, is a faulty CPU... It's rated to run at 3.7Ghz at all times with stock cooling, is it not?


Now I can see what is going on, try under volting the Vcore a little then run prime95 with AVX disabled using this command CpuSupportsAVX=0 in Prime95 folder then add to local.txt 

Prime95 with AVX enabled is high speed processor utilization. You can slow the processor utilization down with disabling AVX in prime95. The processor is fine needs less voltage also.

4.7GHz stock is one core turbo.


----------



## MonarchX

Will report settings ASAP. Do games use AVX like Prime95?


----------



## bee144

KedarWolf said:


> Everything is found here.
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html
> 
> Downloaded the firmware here.
> 
> https://mega.nz/#!mQtiEKQI!Fq95JvbTUhdE6J4TP6dOMtL2i957eOADQ8S-D5yE6J0
> 
> Downloaded the system tools here.
> 
> https://mega.nz/#!CVtyHIjZ!Rwc_BxF8GbVe2Qf6FQP0Aja8ItZNbqSw34m4tyu_wOU
> 
> Open an admin command prompt in C:\User\UserName\Downloads\Intel CSME System Tools v11 r12\Intel CSME System Tools v11 r12\FWUpdate\WIN64 or in the folder you downloaded it to
> 
> and run 'FWUpdLcl64.exe -F 11.8.50.3474_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin' without the quotation marks.
> 
> Profit!!


Thank you! I now report 3474 in my bios.

If my IT admin days serve me correctly, isn't there also a driver that should be installed as well? Is the below link the latest MEI driver?

https://downloadcenter.intel.com/do...for-Intel-NUC-Kit-NUC6i3SY-NUC6i5SY-NUC6i7KYK


----------



## MonarchX

Looks like I got piece of crap CPU here. It won't remain stable at 5Ghz in Prime95 with AVX = 0 and VCore set to manual at 1.36v. CPU temp goes up 100C in seconds, PC locks up, restart. In games, however, 5Ghz was stable for hours...


----------



## MonarchX

I also don't get the whole Multi Core Enhancement thing... Some say to turn it off, but doesn't it simply synchronize all cores to use the same speed? Isn't that best for performance? Why turn it off then?


----------



## Daydreaming

MonarchX said:


> I also don't get the whole Multi Core Enhancement thing... Some say to turn it off, but doesn't it simply synchronize all cores to use the same speed? Isn't that best for performance? Why turn it off then?


Because multi core enhancement is just the Asus inbuilt over clock - it will set all cores at the maximum rated of 4.7GHz where as the stock CPU is designed to run one core at 4.7x under load. The other problem is that in doing this it will normally set the system up to use way more voltage than would be required to achieve the same results with a manual over clock. 

What version of Prime95 are you using? 26.6 doesn't have AVX. Prime95 is setting workloads way above anything the average person is likely to do day to day... My CPU will run 5GHz 'stable' @ 1.31v, but throw in stress tests and it actually needs up to 1.39v to be truly stable. Hence the delid and 280mm radiator for cooling.


----------



## Daydreaming

In device manager my 'intel management engine interface' shows as driver version: 1803.12.0.1093

Should I be looking to update or chnage this for better performance?


----------



## MonarchX

I am using the latest Prime95 29.4 build 8 with AVX = 0. The problem here is that 4.8Ghz cannot be sustained on all cores in Prime95 no matter what... Temps get up to 100C, CPU downclocks to 3.9Ghz. If I use manual voltage, CPU temps stay lower, but PC just locks up... 

With a manual overclock (LLC Calibration 4 or 5 or 6) - I get identical results and the system is not stable even at 4.0Ghz. 3.9Ghz all cores @ 1.41v is as far as it can go... Anything below 1.4v and PC locks up within seconds of starting Prime95. This is the worst OC luck ever, utter garbage...

EDIT:

Are you saying that I should only try to have only one core overclocked? That's not how it was with my 3770K. It would do 4.8Ghz on ALL CORES - ALL CORES 24/7. Does your CPU do 5Ghz on ALL CORES in Prime95 without downclocking?


----------



## MonarchX

BTW, what should I do with cache setting? It's nowhere near as important as the actual ratio, isn't it? Setting it to to the lowest 44x seems to make the system more stable...


----------



## KeY0Ke

MonarchX said:


> Looks like I got piece of crap CPU here. It won't remain stable at 5Ghz in Prime95 with AVX = 0 and VCore set to manual at 1.36v. CPU temp goes up 100C in seconds, PC locks up, restart. In games, however, 5Ghz was stable for hours...


I think 100 celcius is totally abnormal.

Even with my 8700k, stock voltage at about 1.35v (with multicore enhancement on by default) ay 4.7ghz is only 78 celcius. You might want to remount your cryorig r1. I am using nzxt x72, cooling performance should be more or less the same

Your cpu delidded? And whats your SA and IO voltage? I believe is at auto which will end you in 1.3+ volts.


----------



## MonarchX

78C with AVX or without? Which version of Prime95? One core OC or all cores OC?

I did remount my cooler a few minutes ago and that did nothing. My voltage is at 1.328v and temp goes up to 100C only with AVX enabled and only in Prime95, offset for AVX is 0, and CPU multi (ALL cores) is at 48.

In games, CPU temp is at about 70C. I did not delid.


----------



## MonarchX

Research indicates that it all comes down to AVX and even those with custom WC kits can get 100C in latest Prime95 in seconds if they do not delid. Prime95 is just a bad indicator of stabilitt, not representative of normal CPU use, even for gamers and power users

Thing is, apps like Chrome already 0use AVX, which was present even on Sandy Bridge CPU's! In other words, Intel and motherboard makers simply created a very flexible and dynamic clocking functions for Coffee Stain CPU's, but when it comes down to full capability with OC, Coffee Stain CPU's are not that great..

I am thinking of de-lidding, but in the past I messed up a CPU by scratching it. Since then, several safe tools came out. I wish there was a delid + apply liquid metal + re-seal lid service out there.., in that would hold itself liable for accidentally damaging the CPU during the process...


----------



## scracy

MonarchX said:


> Research indicates that it all comes down to AVX and even those with custom WC kits can get 100C in latest Prime95 in seconds if they do not delid. Prime95 is just a bad indicator of stabilitt, not representative of normal CPU use, even for gamers and power users
> 
> Thing is, apps like Chrome already 0use AVX, which was present even on Sandy Bridge CPU's! In other words, Intel and motherboard makers simply created a very flexible and dynamic clocking functions for Coffee Stain CPU's, but when it comes down to full capability with OC, Coffee Stain CPU's are not that great..
> 
> I am thinking of de-lidding, but in the past I messed up a CPU by scratching it. Since then, several safe tools came out. I wish there was a delid + apply liquid metal + re-seal lid service out there.., in that would hold itself liable for accidentally damaging the CPU during the process...


There is a delid service available https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/delid


----------



## MonarchX

That is good news, but bad news is that at 5Ghz, I can't get Chrome to launch without PC locking up... I doubt delid will help that...


----------



## GAN77

Maximus X Hero BIOS and others 1602 
BIOS 1602 is now out.
1. Improve system performance.
2. Support the latest 8th Gen Intel® Core™ Processor.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?103663


----------



## KeY0Ke

MonarchX said:


> 78C with AVX or without? Which version of Prime95? One core OC or all cores OC?
> 
> I did remount my cooler a few minutes ago and that did nothing. My voltage is at 1.328v and temp goes up to 100C only with AVX enabled and only in Prime95, offset for AVX is 0, and CPU multi (ALL cores) is at 48.
> 
> In games, CPU temp is at about 70C. I did not delid.


Nope i dont use avx. I use handbrake avx load for test. Prime95 small ffts will have higher temps definitely but still should not hit 100 celcius man. Totally bad. Some says prime95 small ffts will kill the chip lol

You might want to consider delidding. I think intel stock tim at most can handle only 1.3v only. Anything higher the stock tim cannot cope.


----------



## encrypted11

You aren't supposed to run cores & cache 1:1. Unless you consider running a golden CPU probably past 1.3V, ignore the core frequency headroom and peg core/cache at 1:1. (say 5.1GHz core/cache)

The rule is typically core -300 to 500MHz depending on cooling, per chip variation and the headroom for the chip as it derates at high temperatures.

Another point of interest, [email protected]'s guide on edge up. 
http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/
Check out Jpmboy's guide as well!


----------



## bl4ckdot

Is it the same as 1503 ?


----------



## Daydreaming

MonarchX said:


> BTW, what should I do with cache setting? It's nowhere near as important as the actual ratio, isn't it? Setting it to to the lowest 44x seems to make the system more stable...


I get better stability running the cache at 44x . I've tried up to 47x and I get errors and it makes almost 0 difference in any of the benchmarks I have tried. 

As for 100c... it sounds like your cooling is inadequate for whatever reason.


----------



## MonarchX

encrypted11 said:


> You aren't supposed to run cores & cache 1:1. Unless you consider running a golden CPU probably past 1.3V, ignore the core frequency headroom and peg core/cache at 1:1. (say 5.1GHz core/cache)
> 
> The rule is typically core -300 to 500MHz depending on cooling, per chip variation and the headroom for the chip as it derates at high temperatures.
> 
> Another point of interest, [email protected]'s guide on edge up.
> http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/
> Check out Jpmboy's guide as well!


No idea what you meant by most of it... Should I leave cache on Auto? Peg/core cache at 1:1, but not 1:1? -300 to 500Mhz - variation for what? Main core OC? All core OC? Cache OC? Totally lost me there... When people say they OC to 5Ghz, do they usually mean ALL CORES 24/7 or just ONE core at 5.1Ghz and the rest at 4.3-4.7Ghz?


----------



## wingman99

MonarchX said:


> Research indicates that it all comes down to AVX and even those with custom WC kits can get 100C in latest Prime95 in seconds if they do not delid. Prime95 is just a bad indicator of stabilitt, not representative of normal CPU use, even for gamers and power users
> 
> Thing is, apps like Chrome already 0use AVX, which was present even on Sandy Bridge CPU's! In other words, Intel and motherboard makers simply created a very flexible and dynamic clocking functions for Coffee Stain CPU's, but when it comes down to full capability with OC, Coffee Stain CPU's are not that great..
> 
> I am thinking of de-lidding, but in the past I messed up a CPU by scratching it. Since then, several safe tools came out. I wish there was a delid + apply liquid metal + re-seal lid service out there.., in that would hold itself liable for accidentally damaging the CPU during the process...


I find Prime95 with AVX disabled CpuSupportsAVX=0 is a good representative for normal and heavy PC use.


----------



## MonarchX

Unless of course you use Chrome browser...


----------



## wingman99

MonarchX said:


> Unless of course you use Chrome browser...


Chrome browser and some games use AVX.


----------



## MonarchX

Which games?


----------



## wingman99

Some of the games I have use AVX like BF1. You can test the games your self by setting AVX offset to -5 and play your games and watch to see if the clock speed drops 500Mhz sometimes while playing.


----------



## MonarchX

But AVX use is also varied in AVX-using games, isn't it? Just because AVX is used, doesn't mean its as intensive as Prime95 AVX and will cause your CPU to heat up.


----------



## bee144

MonarchX said:


> But AVX use is also varied in AVX-using games, isn't it? Just because AVX is used, doesn't mean its as intensive as Prime95 AVX and will cause your CPU to heat up.


There was a recent thread on ROG forums. AsusRaja confirmed that some .net libraries use AVX. This can cause AVX to turn on/off in some games and apps that don’t technically list AVX support.

Raja said he’s spoken with Intel about AVX and it’s limitiations but it can take up to 5 years for intel to implement feedback.

Moral of the story: set AVX as tightly as you can as it matters more than most people realize.


----------



## wingman99

MonarchX said:


> But AVX use is also varied in AVX-using games, isn't it? Just because AVX is used, doesn't mean its as intensive as Prime95 AVX and will cause your CPU to heat up.


Yes games and chrome browser that I have seen burst AVX. Blender AVX is not the same intensity as Prime95 AVX.


----------



## SpeedyIV

GAN77 said:


> Maximus X Hero BIOS and others 1602
> BIOS 1602 is now out.
> 1. Improve system performance.
> 2. Support the latest 8th Gen Intel® Core™ Processor.
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?103663


Thanks for posting this. I tried the Kedar Wolf link renaming trick for Maximus X Hero (wifi) which Asus site is STILL showing BIOS 1401. Sure enough, BIOS 1602 for Hero Wifi downloaded no problem. I wonder why Asus is not updating the BIOS pulldown for the Maximus X Hero (wifi). I have barely played with BIOS 1503 and now 1602 is out. Guess I will go ahead and load it and see how things go.


----------



## MonarchX

1602 + UEFI BIOS Updater updates for Intel LAN, RST, iGPU, etc. all run well indeed .


----------



## encrypted11

MonarchX said:


> No idea what you meant by most of it... Should I leave cache on Auto? Peg/core cache at 1:1, but not 1:1? -300 to 500Mhz - variation for what? Main core OC? All core OC? Cache OC? Totally lost me there... When people say they OC to 5Ghz, do they usually mean ALL CORES 24/7 or just ONE core at 5.1Ghz and the rest at 4.3-4.7Ghz?




Paraphrased that.

You aren't supposed to run peg cores to cache frequency (reason in Raja's guide). Unless you consider running a golden CPU probably (running a completely stable cache (uncore) at 5GHz) between 1.3-1.4V is already an incredibly huge challenge. As such, the rule is typically run the cache ratios between -3 to -5 relative to the core ratio depending on cooling, the headroom for the chip as it derates at high temperatures (and silicon lottery).

Another point of interest, [email protected]'s guide on edge up. It's a good read, sets the frequency and voltage expectations right.
http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/
Check out Jpmboy's guide as well!


----------



## KedarWolf

bee144 said:


> Thank you! I now report 3474 in my bios.
> 
> If my IT admin days serve me correctly, isn't there also a driver that should be installed as well? Is the below link the latest MEI driver?
> 
> https://downloadcenter.intel.com/do...for-Intel-NUC-Kit-NUC6i3SY-NUC6i5SY-NUC6i7KYK


Latest MEI driver on the winraid page too, I use the .inf file and manually install it.


----------



## GAN77

KedarWolf said:


> Latest MEI driver on the winraid page too, I use the .inf file and manually install it.


what for?


----------



## KedarWolf

GAN77 said:


> what for?


I prefer installing the driver from the latest inf, that way you don't get a lot of MEI crap and bloatware you don't need. :h34r-smi


----------



## Jpmboy

MonarchX said:


> BTW, what should I do with cache setting? It's nowhere near as important as the actual ratio, isn't it? Setting it to to the lowest 44x seems to make the system more stable...



you really need to read a couple of guides. slamming your CPU into the thermal limit (TJmax) with high current loads like p95 will indeed end up with a crappy CPU. Read Raja's kabylake guide, read mine in the OP of this thread o (linked in my sig


----------



## Sentinela

*Strix Z370-F bios issues!*

Guys, i updated my Strix Z370-F with the latest bios, 1002, and after the update that took forever, bios is lagging, the mouse stutters, even on keyboard its unresponsive. Tried to downgrade to previous version, no sucess. Tried reflash, no sucess. After it post, it works normally, its just inside the bios or using DOS for example. Anyone got issues on this bios?


----------



## Jpmboy

Sentinela said:


> Guys, i updated my Strix Z370-F with the latest bios, 1002, and after the update that took forever, bios is lagging, the mouse stutters, even on keyboard its unresponsive. Tried to downgrade to previous version, no sucess. Tried reflash, no sucess. *After it post, it works normally*, its just inside the bios or using DOS for example. Anyone got issues on this bios?



you mean after it boots to windows it is working okay? erm... you may want to use bios recovery as described in the manual and see if that helps. Always flash after loading "Optimized Defaults" or after a clrcmos.


----------



## Sentinela

Jpmboy said:


> you mean after it boots to windows it is working okay? erm... you may want to use bios recovery as described in the manual and see if that helps. Always flash after loading "Optimized Defaults" or after a clrcmos.


Well, i tried the recovery thing. I didn't defaulted my settings BEFORE the flash, only AFTER...maybe it is related? Will try again later the recovery procedure! Thx dude!


----------



## VadimM

Any info on "best" Z370 ROG/Prime bios version?


----------



## Sentinela

No sucess on my attempt to fix the bios lag. Tried everything i could so far. Removed my optane module, gpu, testes 1 ram lot at the time, nothing. Will have to wait for the next bios update to see if it fixes...


----------



## Jpmboy

Sentinela said:


> No sucess on my attempt to fix the bios lag. Tried everything i could so far. Removed my optane module, gpu, testes 1 ram lot at the time, nothing. Will have to wait for the next bios update to see if it fixes...



bios recovery using the cd/dvd that came with the board will revert the bios back to the version it shipped with. Pretty straight forward to do (I have done it a few times - even had it recover a bios I loaded on a clean, connected HDD). If this is what you tried, after doing a clrcmos, and it still is lagging in bios ... ugh, that's a head-sctatcher.


----------



## trickeh2k

Hi guys,

I'm kinda sad at the moment because it looks like a might have to RMA my gpu or board, most likely the latter. So i've built this new system just a few months ago and it's been rocking every game fine, that is until I tried playing Wreckfest and noticed that I got super poor performance and couldn't figure out why.
After joining the Discord for the game, a user quickly pointed out that I should check my link speed on the PCI-E slot. Boom, issue located! For some reason, it only runs in x2 mode, not even x4. Found this out yesterday and have spent quite some time troubleshooting it since. All of my efforts have been to no avail sadly and due to my system being a custom waterloop, basic troubleshooting steps for hardware is quite troublesome. 

For starters, I can't access the second slot without tearing down and rebuilding the loop, same goes for trying a different graphics card or, my current one in a different system. I reseated the card twice, flashed the mobo, cleared cmos, re-installed drivers twice with ddu. No change, shows up as x2 in bios and windows anyway  Is there anything else you can think of that I can try before tearing down the loop and eventually RMAing either the GPU or mobo? All power settings are disabled in bios btw.

Regards in despair


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

trickeh2k said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I'm kinda sad at the moment because it looks like a might have to RMA my gpu or board, most likely the latter. So i've built this new system just a few months ago and it's been rocking every game fine, that is until I tried playing Wreckfest and noticed that I got super poor performance and couldn't figure out why.
> After joining the Discord for the game, a user quickly pointed out that I should check my link speed on the PCI-E slot. Boom, issue located! For some reason, it only runs in x2 mode, not even x4. Found this out yesterday and have spent quite some time troubleshooting it since. All of my efforts have been to no avail sadly and due to my system being a custom waterloop, basic troubleshooting steps for hardware is quite troublesome.
> 
> For starters, I can't access the second slot without tearing down and rebuilding the loop, same goes for trying a different graphics card or, my current one in a different system. I reseated the card twice, flashed the mobo, cleared cmos, re-installed drivers twice with ddu. No change, shows up as x2 in bios and windows anyway  Is there anything else you can think of that I can try before tearing down the loop and eventually RMAing either the GPU or mobo? All power settings are disabled in bios btw.
> 
> Regards in despair


Clean the gpu slot with a tooth brush and isopropyl alcohol. Take out the cpu and check the socket for bent pins or debris. Even just reseating the cpu and installing the block/cooler back evenly can fix this.


----------



## trickeh2k

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Clean the gpu slot with a tooth brush and isopropyl alcohol. Take out the cpu and check the socket for bent pins or debris. Even just reseating the cpu and installing the block/cooler back evenly can fix this.


Already cleaned it, but didn't really think it would be an issue since both the board and gpu are about two months old. So, it's either a broken socket, or as you said a bent pin or likewise. Argh


----------



## Jpmboy

trickeh2k said:


> Already cleaned it, but didn't really think it would be an issue since both the board and gpu are about two months old. So, it's either a broken socket, or as you said a bent pin or likewise. Argh


 which slot is the card in, and what else is on the PCIE bus?


(was it running x2 all along??)


----------



## Scotty99

If anyone was curious as to the standing of the gsync windowed mode fiasco with windows version 1803 nvidia claims it is fixed with the next driver release (even after stating a driver wouldnt fix it a couple months ago...):
https://forums.geforce.com/default/...g-creators-quot-windowed-g-sync-is-broken/22/

Luckily for them 99% of people with gsync monitors arent perceptive enough to tell when its active or not, this worked out quite good for their PR team.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> If anyone was curious as to the standing of the gsync windowed mode fiasco with windows version 1803 nvidia claims it is fixed with the next driver release (even after stating a driver wouldnt fix it a couple months ago...):
> https://forums.geforce.com/default/...g-creators-quot-windowed-g-sync-is-broken/22/
> 
> Luckily for them 99% of people with gsync monitors arent perceptive enough to tell when its active or not, this worked out quite good for their PR team.



G-Synch?


----------



## trickeh2k

Jpmboy said:


> which slot is the card in, and what else is on the PCIE bus?
> 
> 
> (was it running x2 all along??)


It's in the top slot (the one recommended for running single card setup). Second slot is empty. I have an M2 drive connected as well as an sound card. I'm not sure if this happened over time or if it's been like this since i first set this system up, probably has. Just that not many games, even modern ones requires such bandwitch to have a significant impact on performance.


----------



## MonarchX

Scotty99 said:


> If anyone was curious as to the standing of the gsync windowed mode fiasco with windows version 1803 nvidia claims it is fixed with the next driver release (even after stating a driver wouldnt fix it a couple months ago...):
> https://forums.geforce.com/default/...g-creators-quot-windowed-g-sync-is-broken/22/
> 
> Luckily for them 99% of people with gsync monitors arent perceptive enough to tell when its active or not, this worked out quite good for their PR team.


Why do you bother with any Windows 10 build past 1607-14393? 1607 is the last build to support proper fullscreen without overlay crap. It already comes with WDDM that supports HDR, has the least number of issues, is the most updated, most optimized (least RAM use), has the least amount of bloatware, allows to remove and disable many more of Store-related processes/services/drivers compared to newer Windows 10 builds, has no issues with ENB, ReShade, madVR, nVidia drivers (HDR support), etc. 

All the Windows builds afterwards are advantageous only to those who want newer WDDM support, which adds nothing useful aside from VR enhancements...


----------



## Jpmboy

MonarchX said:


> Why do you bother with any Windows 10 build past 1607-14393? 1607 is the last build to support proper fullscreen without overlay crap. It already comes with WDDM that supports HDR, has the least number of issues, is the most updated, most optimized (least RAM use), has the least amount of bloatware, *allows to remove and disable many more of Store-related processes/services/drivers compared to newer Windows 10 builds*, has no issues with ENB, ReShade, madVR, nVidia drivers (HDR support), etc.
> 
> All the Windows builds afterwards are advantageous only to those who want newer WDDM support, which adds nothing useful aside from VR enhancements...


you can remove/disable any of the add-ons (store or wherever) using the powershell.





Spoiler



Copy and paste one or more of the following commands into the PowerShell prompt, pressing Enter after each one to remove the apps you don’t want on your Windows 10 system:
Uninstall 3D Builder:
Get-AppxPackage *3dbuilder* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Alarms and Clock:
Get-AppxPackage *windowsalarms* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Calculator:
Get-AppxPackage *windowscalculator* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Calendar and Mail:
Get-AppxPackage *windowscommunicationsapps* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Camera:
Get-AppxPackage *windowscamera* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Contact Support:
This app can’t be removed.
Uninstall Cortana:
This app can’t be removed.
Uninstall Get Office:
Get-AppxPackage *officehub* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Get Skype:
Get-AppxPackage *skypeapp* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Get Started:
Get-AppxPackage *getstarted* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Groove Music:
Get-AppxPackage *zunemusic* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Maps:
Get-AppxPackage *windowsmaps* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Microsoft Edge:
This app can’t be removed.
Uninstall Microsoft Solitaire Collection:
Get-AppxPackage *solitairecollection* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Money:
Get-AppxPackage *bingfinance* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Movies & TV:
Get-AppxPackage *zunevideo* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall News:
Get-AppxPackage *bingnews* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall OneNote:
Get-AppxPackage *onenote* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall People:
Get-AppxPackage *people* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Phone Companion:
Get-AppxPackage *windowsphone* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Photos:
Get-AppxPackage *photos* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Store:
Get-AppxPackage *windowsstore* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Sports:
Get-AppxPackage *bingsports* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Voice Recorder:
Get-AppxPackage *soundrecorder* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Weather:
Get-AppxPackage *bingweather* | Remove-AppxPackage
Uninstall Windows Feedback:
This app can’t be removed.
Uninstall Xbox:
Get-AppxPackage *xboxapp* | Remove-AppxPackage

How to Reinstall All Built-in Apps
If you decide you want the preinstalled apps back, you can get them back with a single line of PowerShell code. Again, open a PowerShell window as Administrator. Copy and paste the following line into the PowerShell window and press Enter:
Get-AppxPackage -AllUsers| Foreach {Add-AppxPackage -DisableDevelopmentMode -Register “$($_.InstallLocation)\AppXManifest.xml”}
This tells Windows to install those default apps again. Give it some time and allow it to finish, even if nothing appears to happen at first. Even if you see an error message, restart and examine your Start menu — you may just have all those default apps back again, anyway.


----------



## KedarWolf

8 Core Coffee Lake Z370 compatible.

https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel-core-i9-z370-support


----------



## feznz

This later article looks likely the i9 will not be compatible with z370 but will coincide with the z390 release guess we will have to wait n see....
https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel-i9-release-date-specs-performance


----------



## KedarWolf

feznz said:


> This later article looks likely the i9 will not be compatible with z390 but will coincide with the z390 release guess we will have to wait n see....
> https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel-i9-release-date-specs-performance


Let's wait or the Z370 modded BIOS then!!


----------



## encrypted11

Why would you need a BIOS mod?



GAN77 said:


> A new bios 1503 includes a microcode for eight-core processors. Intel makes a "gift"?))
> 
> 
> 
> encrypted11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like 906EC isn't the refreshed hex core.
> https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/sa00115-microcode-update-guidance.pdf
Click to expand...

What Steven B. (Sin0822) had to say.
https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/c..._h310_support_upto_8_cores/e189x1z/?context=3


----------



## Scotty99

Ive been saying that ever since z370 released, the reason they didnt make it backwards compatible was to enable the 8 cores on 370. Not that ill upgrade, 6c12t will be good for what i do for at least 5 years.

As an aside for people following the gsync/windowed mode issues, WoW released a patch yesterday that removed fullscreen altogether meaning people who have updated to the latest version of windows 3 months ago have a non functioning 400-2000 dollar monitor. Great work nvidia, lulz.


----------



## KedarWolf

encrypted11 said:


> Why would you need a BIOS mod?
> 
> 
> 
> What Steven B. (Sin0822) had to say.
> https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/c..._h310_support_upto_8_cores/e189x1z/?context=3


if Z370 doesn't support the 8 core CPUs someone will likely mod the BIOS so it does, has happened with other platforms like Z170 modded for Z270...


----------



## scracy

Scotty99 said:


> Ive been saying that ever since z370 released, the reason they didnt make it backwards compatible was to enable the 8 cores on 370. Not that ill upgrade, 6c12t will be good for what i do for at least 5 years.
> 
> As an aside for people following the gsync/windowed mode issues, WoW released a patch yesterday that removed fullscreen altogether meaning people who have updated to the latest version of windows 3 months ago have a non functioning 400-2000 dollar monitor. Great work nvidia, lulz.


I said the exact same thing back when Z370 was released and got shouted down for it at the time, what ASUS said in a roundabout way at the time was that socket changes were not required for the 6C/12T processors which only confirmed my thoughts, Intel have always had 2 generations of CPU's on 1 chipset, given the pressure from AMD why would they have changed what they have done in the past for the worse instead of better?


----------



## encrypted11

scracy said:


> I said the exact same thing back when Z370 was released and got shouted down for it at the time, what ASUS said in a roundabout way at the time was that socket changes were not required for the 6C/12T processors which only confirmed my thoughts, Intel have always had 2 generations of CPU's on 1 chipset, given the pressure from AMD why would they have changed what they have done in the past for the worse instead of better?


They converted about 19 reserved pins to Vcc pins. Probably that was done with the 8 core in mind?

I do recall Z370I Strix's marketing document referencing the i5-7600K for the rated memory OC section for a couple of months 

But so far this is looking to be exactly in line. with the " 2 generation of CPU's on 1 chipset"


----------



## feznz

I would think that a modded bios will be a go :thumb:
Just looking here at the z270 vs z370 pin layout at least every pin is assigned in the z370 

https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/intel/microarchitectures/coffee_lake#Power_delivery


----------



## MonarchX

Er... The 1602 BIOS for ASUS Hero X, supposedly, already supports 9000-series CPU's.


----------



## Jpmboy

encrypted11 said:


> Why would you need a BIOS mod?
> 
> 
> 
> What Steven B. (Sin0822) had to say.
> https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/c..._h310_support_upto_8_cores/e189x1z/?context=3



right... if it is an 8th gen DT processor, we expect the 300 series chipset to support it. Main issue will be whether one's board has a strong enough power section to readily handle 8c/16t processors.


----------



## gammagoat

Jpmboy said:


> right... if it is an 8th gen DT processor, we expect the 300 series chipset to support it. Main issue will be whether one's board has a strong enough power section to readily handle 8c/16t processors.


What are your thoughts on the Asus lineup, I would think that Hero X and up should be good to go. But I really don't know.


----------



## GeneO

Jpmboy said:


> encrypted11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would you need a BIOS mod?
> 
> 
> 
> What Steven B. (Sin0822) had to say.
> https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/c..._h310_support_upto_8_cores/e189x1z/?context=3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> right... if it is an 8th gen DT processor, we expect the 300 series chipset to support it. Main issue will be whether one's board has a strong enough power section to readily handle 8c/16t processors. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

And I think it is safe to say forget 5GHz on air unless you get a golden chip.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> right... if it is an 8th gen DT processor, we expect the 300 series chipset to support it. Main issue will be whether one's board has a strong enough power section to readily handle 8c/16t processors.


Likely a good thing I never bought an 8086k. 

*Intel rumoured to launch its 9th Gen processors next month
*

Whispers of Intel’s 9th generation of processors have been doing the rounds for quite some time, hinting that the chip will be an 8th gen refresh sporting Coffee Lake-S architecture rather than a brand new design. We’ve known that it is right around the corner for quite some time, but rumours indicate that it could be announced as early as next month, alongside the Z390 chipset.

Although a launch date is expected sometime afterwards, German site PC Builders Club believes that Intel will debut its top-of-the-line 9th gen Core CPUs on August 1st, with a target overclock of 5.5Ghz. The publication has no known history of reliability when it comes to leaks, however, so it’s worth taking this information with a pinch of salt.

The timing does seem like it could have some merit, however, allowing Intel to properly combat AMD’s recent Ryzen refresh. This includes at least 10 different chips referenced in leaked microcode, offering customers the choice between 4 cores and 4 threads, all the way up to the introduction of the long-awaited 8-core, 16-thread Core i9-9900K.

https://www.kitguru.net/components/...-to-launch-its-9th-gen-processors-next-month/


----------



## Daydreaming

Scotty99 said:


> If anyone was curious as to the standing of the gsync windowed mode fiasco with windows version 1803 nvidia claims it is fixed with the next driver release (even after stating a driver wouldnt fix it a couple months ago...):
> https://forums.geforce.com/default/...g-creators-quot-windowed-g-sync-is-broken/22/
> 
> Luckily for them 99% of people with gsync monitors arent perceptive enough to tell when its active or not, this worked out quite good for their PR team.


I wish I had known this before buying my monitor (Z35p). 3440x1440p with 'only' a 1080 gtx it really needs the G-sync to function to make some games fully enjoyable. I can definitely tell when it isn't working so I'm forced to play full screen (if the game allows) when I would prefer to be using windowed. 

They slap a huge g-sync tax on these monitors and then it doesn't even work properly... such bull****. I'm seriously tempted to return it to Amazon (5 days left to do so). I would have been just as well off sticking with two smaller screens.


----------



## Scotty99

Daydreaming said:


> I wish I had known this before buying my monitor (Z35p). 3440x1440p with 'only' a 1080 gtx it really needs the G-sync to function to make some games fully enjoyable. I can definitely tell when it isn't working so I'm forced to play full screen (if the game allows) when I would prefer to be using windowed.
> 
> They slap a huge g-sync tax on these monitors and then it doesn't even work properly... such bull****. I'm seriously tempted to return it to Amazon (5 days left to do so). I would have been just as well off sticking with two smaller screens.


Yea its pretty ridiculous lol. At least we are pretty close to getting a fix, whenever nvidia decides to release the next big driver update. Then i can finally update my windows+bios, heh.

More to the topic of the thread tho, its been 4 months for my 1.376v 5.0 overclock and no whea errors reported in that time span. Not the best clocking chip but glad i can get 5.0 stable under 1.4v i guess.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> right... if it is an 8th gen DT processor, we expect the 300 series chipset to support it. Main issue will be whether one's board has a strong enough power section to readily handle 8c/16t processors.


Here's how I HAVE to manually set my RTLs, @Jpmboy

Is this actually working for me?


----------



## apw63

Scotty99 said:


> More to the topic of the thread tho, its been 4 months for my 1.376v 5.0 overclock and no whea errors reported in that time span. Not the best clocking chip but glad i can get 5.0 stable under 1.4v i guess.


Until I updated the BIOS on my MFX to 1503. I could only do 5.0ghz at 1.376v. Afterwords I was able to reduce vcore to 1.35v up cash to 47 RAM stayed the same XMP ROG profile 3300. I was very surprize that by updating the BOIS, I could drop voltage that much, so far so good for the ~last month.


----------



## VadimM

I've updated bios to 1002 and changed win10 to win7 and now I can't stabilize @ 5200 at all.
What I like on OCing is such sudden things 

PS checked the cause. It is OS. Now wondering if it is chipset driver or something else.


----------



## Esenel

*i7-8086k + M10H + 3600CL15 Kit*

Hi everybody,


New to the Intel Z370 platform, coming from Ryzen1.

I bought the Maximus 10 Hero and I tested BIOS 1301, 1401 and now 1602 and with all of them I am unable to change VCCSA and VCCIO which is hindering me from getting higher RAM frequencies and even XMP-frequency has its issues.
VCCSA stays at 1.072 V although I set 1.20 V.
VCCIO stays at 0.976 V although I set 1.20 V.

VCore and DRAM can be changed and are according to what I set them.
I use HWInfo 5.86-3480 to read out the values.


CPU seems to be fine and is doing 5.2 Ghz @ 1.37 V in Prime95 26.6 - 1344 FFT for 1hr. Temps between 61 to 67°C.


I would be glad if somebody could hint where my mistake is that these settings do not apply.
As a guidance I use JPmboy's and der8auer's OC Guides.

But as i said entering any Voltage to VCCSA and VCCIO do not apply :-(

Thanks in advance!


----------



## KedarWolf

Esenel said:


> Hi everybody,
> 
> 
> New to the Intel Z370 platform, coming from Ryzen1.
> 
> I bought the Maximus 10 Hero and I tested BIOS 1301, 1401 and now 1602 and with all of them I am unable to change VCCSA and VCCIO which is hindering me from getting higher RAM frequencies and even XMP-frequency has its issues.
> VCCSA stays at 1.072 V although I set 1.20 V.
> VCCIO stays at 0.976 V although I set 1.20 V.
> 
> VCore and DRAM can be changed and are according to what I set them.
> I use HWInfo 5.86-3480 to read out the values.
> 
> 
> CPU seems to be fine and is doing 5.2 Ghz @ 1.37 V in Prime95 26.6 - 1344 FFT for 1hr. Temps between 61 to 67°C.
> 
> 
> I would be glad if somebody could hint where my mistake is that these settings do not apply.
> As a guidance I use JPmboy's and der8auer's OC Guides.
> 
> But as i said entering any Voltage to VCCSA and VCCIO do not apply :-(
> 
> Thanks in advance!


Try disabling XMP and putting it on Manual.


----------



## Esenel

KedarWolf said:


> Try disabling XMP and putting it on Manual.


Already done from the beginning after first XMP attemp. No change.
These are my current settings with BIOS 1602:


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> Here's how I HAVE to manually set my RTLs, @*Jpmboy*
> 
> Is this actually working for me?



Sure that would work. I gather (understand) that putting the offset at 21 on both channels and than setting 57/59 for the rtls does not - correct?



Esenel said:


> Already done from the beginning after first XMP attemp. No change.
> These are my current settings with BIOS 1602:


Try cpu SVID = Auto. Also, after loading XMP... have you since done a CLRCMOS or flashed bios, or at least loaded "Optimized Defaults"?


----------



## Jpmboy

gammagoat said:


> What are your thoughts on the Asus lineup, I would think that Hero X and up should be good to go. But I really don't know.


Hero X will be fine. A fan on the vrm will help a lot.


GeneO said:


> And I think it is safe to say forget 5GHz on air unless you get a golden chip.


and live in a freezer. 


Daydreaming said:


> I wish I had known this before buying my monitor (Z35p). 3440x1440p with 'only' a 1080 gtx it really needs the G-sync to function to make some games fully enjoyable. I can definitely tell when it isn't working so I'm forced to play full screen (if the game allows) when I would prefer to be using windowed.
> 
> They slap a huge g-sync tax on these monitors and then it doesn't even work properly... such bull****. I'm seriously tempted to return it to Amazon (5 days left to do so). I would have been just as well off sticking with two smaller screens.


I wouldn;t have expected a single 1080 to drive 3440x1440p to consistent frame rates at all (I know mine won't do 4K well at all and it runs stable at 2130+). you need a Ti or Titan Xp... or a pair of 1080s.


----------



## Esenel

Jpmboy said:


> Try cpu SVID = Auto. Also, after loading XMP... have you since done a CLRCMOS or flashed bios, or at least loaded "Optimized Defaults"?


Yes I did CLRCMOS.
Also flashed back to 1301.
2x CLRCMOS
Flash BIOS
1x CLRCMOS

Same issue.

Also on Manual OC everything else auto and just trying to change these two values. Nothing.
They stay fixed.
Even reseated the CPU und checked the power cables.
I can change every value but not VCCSA and VCCIO :-(

PIN for/on the cpu? But these are at least two different PINS I guess?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Jpmboy

Esenel said:


> Yes I did CLRCMOS.
> Also flashed back to 1301.
> 2x CLRCMOS
> Flash BIOS
> 1x CLRCMOS
> 
> Same issue.
> 
> Also on Manual OC everything else auto and just trying to change these two values. Nothing.
> They stay fixed.
> Even reseated the CPU und checked the power cables.
> I can change every value but not VCCSA and VCCIO :-(
> 
> PIN for/on the cpu? But these are at least two different PINS I guess?
> 
> Thanks in advance!



i doubt these are bent pin symptoms... might be worth taking a look, but i doubt it. IDK what's going on there. if the reflash (es) were successful, any XMP bork would be wiped. :headscrat


----------



## KedarWolf

Esenel said:


> Yes I did CLRCMOS.
> Also flashed back to 1301.
> 2x CLRCMOS
> Flash BIOS
> 1x CLRCMOS
> 
> Same issue.
> 
> Also on Manual OC everything else auto and just trying to change these two values. Nothing.
> They stay fixed.
> Even reseated the CPU und checked the power cables.
> I can change every value but not VCCSA and VCCIO :-(
> 
> PIN for/on the cpu? But these are at least two different PINS I guess?
> 
> Thanks in advance!


When you flashed it back did you use USB Flashback, if not, try that. And the BIOS needs to be renamed correctly and the USB Flashback light should flash a minute or two.


----------



## Esenel

KedarWolf said:


> When you flashed it back did you use USB Flashback, if not, try that. And the BIOS needs to be renamed correctly and the USB Flashback light should flash a minute or two.


Yes I only use USB flashback.
Filename is M10H.

I am able to flash the bios.
It also appears as the correct version and it installs and configures itself after the flashprocess and the first start.

But these two voltages are stuck.

Also changed the RAM to one stick of 8GB and in another dimm socket. The one next to the cpu(which is not intended for one dimm, I know). No change.

I really do not understand it.


----------



## feznz

http://digiworthy.com/2018/07/23/intel-core-i9-9900k-i7-specs/

looks good!


----------



## bl4ckdot

feznz said:


> http://digiworthy.com/2018/07/23/intel-core-i9-9900k-i7-specs/
> 
> looks good!



looks also fake


----------



## Jpmboy

bl4ckdot said:


> looks also fake



even if it is true... seems pretty "incremental" vs the 8700K (which is a very good CPU overall).


----------



## bl4ckdot

Jpmboy said:


> even if it is true... seems pretty "incremental" vs the 8700K (which is a very good CPU overall).


I mean ... it's a bit "too good to be true". I would buy that in a heartbeat !


----------



## KedarWolf

Esenel said:


> Yes I only use USB flashback.
> Filename is M10H.
> 
> I am able to flash the bios.
> It also appears as the correct version and it installs and configures itself after the flashprocess and the first start.
> 
> But these two voltages are stuck.
> 
> Also changed the RAM to one stick of 8GB and in another dimm socket. The one next to the cpu(which is not intended for one dimm, I know). No change.
> 
> I really do not understand it.


Did you try flashing the latest BIOS while in the BIOS?

I know it updates the MEI firmware when you do it that way, but doesn't through USB Flashback.


----------



## Esenel

KedarWolf said:


> Did you try flashing the latest BIOS while in the BIOS?
> 
> I know it updates the MEI firmware when you do it that way, but doesn't through USB Flashback.


No change :-(

Used BIOS flashback with BIOS 1602. Saw it doing the MEI firmware update.

Also tried in the memory option mode1 and mode 2. (what is their use actually?)

Also talked to the vendor. They will also see into this.

Thanks for your help here!


----------



## feznz

Jpmboy said:


> even if it is true... seems pretty "incremental" vs the 8700K (which is a very good CPU overall).





bl4ckdot said:


> I mean ... it's a bit "too good to be true". I would buy that in a heartbeat !




I am not the only one to believe there could be some truth to the rumour another google search takes quite a few news sites re-reporting the same leak snapshot.
Would be finally a good performance boost that have been lacking for the last 5 or so generations.

then again could also be the same demonstration reported here just a little exotic cooling required 
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-cpu-28-core-5-ghz,37201.html

If true I am very excited if it is supported to z370 socket.


----------



## wingman99

I don't think it is 5 generations since the last mainstream performance boost we now have 6 cores instead of 4.


----------



## MonarchX

New MEI Firmware is out of Station Drivers and a few days ago new RST drivers were released.dor the latest firmware. Updating galore! Still can't remember the MEI updater CMD command for flashing. Does MEI Firmware come with release notes? Z370 must have been problematic when it was introduced because it gets more updates for BIOS than any board I have owned previously. 


It may be a good thing Intel is dropping Hyper Threading in 9700K, if it results in better OC. I think only a handful.of games benefit from it.

I thought 9900K would reach 5.5Ghz, so I would upgrade my poorly overclockable 8700K. 5.5Ghz 8 cores vs 4.8Ghz 6 cores would probably increase FPS by 4 or 5! Or 6! Maybe less or more, but it would.

With that said, should I keep BCLK adaptable voltage? I do not overclock BCLK... There is also some remote BCLK Spread Spectrum setting in BIOS section that does not deal with OC, some mention of testing something...


----------



## MonarchX

I forgot to ask about RAM! How is it cheaper G Skill 3200Mhz RAM can OC to 4400Mhz while more expensive and supposedly.best-quality Corsair Dominator Platinum 3200Mhz can barely.OC to 3300Mhz?


----------



## feznz

wingman99 said:


> I don't think it is 5 generations since the last mainstream performance boost we now have 6 cores instead of 4.


you are right for multi-threaded appications but for single threaded applications this chart says it all roughly 30% since sandy bridge or roughly 5% per generration 

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html



MonarchX said:


> I forgot to ask about RAM! How is it cheaper G Skill 3200Mhz RAM can OC to 4400Mhz while more expensive and supposedly.best-quality Corsair Dominator Platinum 3200Mhz can barely.OC to 3300Mhz?


I have the cheaper Gskill 3200Mhz ram it does not like to be OC because it is not the Samsung B-dies be sure to identify the ram as having B-dies chips whoever the manufacturer is.


----------



## gammagoat

Ran a little experiment on my hero X, I directed a stream of air from my air mattress pump over the vertical VRM heatsink and low and behold the T2 reading in Hwinfo dropped by 2c. I only directed the air for about 45 seconds, but seems to me that there is a sensor there and its active.

Would anyone be interested in confirming this on their board?


----------



## Scotty99

Its cool that more cores are finally available to the public but we need software to mature (especially GAMES lol) before it actually matters. 95% of the games i play even new titles dont benefit past 4 cores, clockspeed is still king.


----------



## SpeedyIV

gammagoat said:


> Ran a little experiment on my hero X, I directed a stream of air from my air mattress pump over the vertical VRM heatsink and low and behold the T2 reading in Hwinfo dropped by 2c. I only directed the air for about 45 seconds, but seems to me that there is a sensor there and its active.
> 
> Would anyone be interested in confirming this on their board?


Hmm. That is interesting. I have a Hero X WIFI that has never reported a VRM temp sensor, through the EC buss or otherwise. I stuck a temp probe up under the heat sink and monitor it that way. I get reasonable readings but I don't know if they are accurate. Your idea of cooling the VRMs and seeing which (if any) of those generically named MOBO temp sensors changes is a great idea. My Hero X wifi reports several unidentified temp sensors. Maybe one of them is the long lost VRM temp. If VRM Temp is reported, just not identified, its curious that no one from Asus would just say so when posts about missing VRM temp data were flying around this forum and the ROG forum. I will try this and report back.


----------



## gammagoat

SpeedyIV said:


> Hmm. That is interesting. I have a Hero X WIFI that has never reported a VRM temp sensor, through the EC buss or otherwise. I stuck a temp probe up under the heat sink and monitor it that way. I get reasonable readings but I don't know if they are accurate. Your idea of cooling the VRMs and seeing which (if any) of those generically named MOBO temp sensors changes is a great idea. My Hero X wifi reports several unidentified temp sensors. Maybe one of them is the long lost VRM temp. If VRM Temp is reported, just not identified, its curious that no one from Asus would just say so when posts about missing VRM temp data were flying around this forum and the ROG forum. I will try this and report back.


Thanks, 

Instead of directing air today I'm going to insulate the vrm heatsinks themselves, that I think should remove any doubt.


----------



## KedarWolf

8 cores, 8 threads. 

https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cp...software_database_-_confirms_specifications/1

Intel i7-9700K appears on SiSoftware Database - Confirms Specifications
Intel's upcoming i7-9700K CPU has been found on the SiSoftware database, confirming several previously specifications of the processor. For starters, the processor is listed as using a Coffee Lake S client platform, which suggests that the processor will be usable on today's 300-series motherboards after a BIOS update. 

This database listing also confirms that the i7-9700K will lack hyperthreading, making it the first desktop-grade i7 processor to do so, offering users eight cores and eight threads. This change creates an unusual situation where Intel's previous generation i7 8700K could deliver more performance in selected workloads, with its six cores and twelve threads, though this depends on how well applications utilise higher thread counts and SMT technologies.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Thats good. 8/8 should be better than 6/12. This also could confirm the i9 that we were discussing yesterday.


----------



## KedarWolf

bl4ckdot said:


> Thats good. 8/8 should be better than 6/12. This also could confirm the i9 that we were discussing yesterday.


You think they never did 16 threads to lower the power draw so Z370 boards can handle it?


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> bl4ckdot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats good. 8/8 should be better than 6/12. This also could confirm the i9 that we were discussing yesterday.
> 
> 
> 
> You think they never did 16 threads to lower the power draw so Z370 boards can handle it? /forum/images/smilies/redface.gif
Click to expand...

I was just going to say that it might just work delidded @ 5Ghz on air on current boards without the HT.


----------



## feznz

maybe there is some truth to the leaks, 9700k 8core-8thread 3.6Ghz base clock and 9900k to be a 8core 16thread CPU 3.6 base clock, will be interesting to see the actual boost clocks.

though the 9600k similar to the 8600k it has a higher boost frequency.


----------



## Jpmboy

I'm not sure I understand the excitement about 2 more cores on this PCIE-limited platform... ?


----------



## feznz

Jpmboy said:


> I'm not sure I understand the excitement about 2 more cores on this PCIE-limited platform... ?



Good call 
I was still debating if I would get a 9900k only if the price was right 
The 8600k is enough for my CPU requirements and knowing me and from previous dissappionting sliht grades I will probably wait a few more generations


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> I'm not sure I understand the excitement about 2 more cores on this PCIE-limited platform... ?


You said it.
All those extra 2 cores and no extra PCIE lanes to take advantage of them.
Heck they could of bumped it up to 18 or 20, but no it's still limited to 16...


----------



## KedarWolf

schoolofmonkey said:


> You said it.
> All those extra 2 cores and no extra PCIE lanes to take advantage of them.
> Heck they could of bumped it up to 18 or 20, but no it's still limited to 16...


If I have a video card at 16X, 2 4X PCI-E SSDs and a sound card at 1x why is my video card getting 16x?

Is it because the second PCI-E SSD gets it lanes from the SATA controller? I think it disables some SATA ports if I'm correct.


----------



## bl4ckdot

KedarWolf said:


> If I have a video card at 16X, 2 4X PCI-E SSDs and a sound card at 1x why is my video card getting 16x?
> 
> Is it because the second PCI-E SSD gets it lanes from the SATA controller? I think it disables some SATA ports if I'm correct.



Your SSDs and sound card go through the PCH (DMI link), GPU is directly connected to the CPU.


----------



## scracy

KedarWolf said:


> If I have a video card at 16X, 2 4X PCI-E SSDs and a sound card at 1x why is my video card getting 16x?
> 
> Is it because the second PCI-E SSD gets it lanes from the SATA controller? I think it disables some SATA ports if I'm correct.


16 PCI-E lanes for your graphics card (second slot from the top of board) are direct from the CPU and another 24 lanes from the PCH (chipset) for everything else including SATA ports,USB ports etc. PCH is connected to the CPU via DMI 3.0 which has the equivalent bandwidth of 4 PCI-E 3.0 lanes


----------



## VadimM

I'd prefer 6/12 processor with higher frequency instead of 8/8. Just like 8086k but without LE overprice.
I have 4/4 atm and it heats Prime Z370-A VRM very well. Mb is Z270 copy so it is already working under 150% load when equipped with hexacore. Midrange z370 boards won't be enough for OCed octacores...
So, from pessimist point of view:
9900k - cool, but new MB
9700k - ***, 8700k is better
9600k - ***, 8700/8700k is better


----------



## encrypted11

What the Skull Trail architect had to say.


----------



## swddeluxx

Hi *Kedar Wolf*

can you *please*  make 1003 Bios with latest microcode for ROG MAXIMUS X HERO *(WI-FI AC)* for my daughter?
In my opinion 1003 is the best bios from all bios versions for this mainboard.


----------



## feznz

encrypted11 said:


> What the Skull Trail architect had to say.


thats what made the 9900k interesting that reportedly easily achievable 5.5Ghz OC 

and some more interesting news.
https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cp..._9900k_and_i7_9700k_are_reportedly_soldered/1


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> If I have a video card at 16X, 2 4X PCI-E SSDs and a sound card at 1x why is my video card getting 16x?
> 
> Is it because the second PCI-E SSD gets it lanes from the SATA controller? I think it disables some SATA ports if I'm correct.


ninja'd, but the other slots work off the PCH. This platform works great with a single card, SLI is a different story. And right now, nothing (no single or multiple card system) games at 4K or 1440P like a pair of TXps. The Titan V is very good, and paired with a 5.2+ 8700K is amazing up to 4K/60, but simply crushed by SLI TXps at 4K/60 or 1440P 144Hz on x299 in my experience. 


encrypted11 said:


> What the Skull Trail architect had to say.


lol - I still run an INtel DX48-BT2 Skulltrail board as a security camera server. Incredible platform, with builtin sata/eSATA port multiplier.


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> Hi *Kedar Wolf*
> 
> can you *please*  make 1003 Bios with latest microcode for ROG MAXIMUS X HERO *(WI-FI AC)* for my daughter?
> In my opinion 1003 is the best bios from all bios versions for this mainboard.


Yes, will do.

If you want I'll upgrade the SATA/RAID controller firmware, LAN firmware and the Intel Graphics firmware as well. 

I'll do both versions, one with just the microcode and another with all the firmware updated.


----------



## swddeluxx

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, will do.
> 
> If you want I'll upgrade the SATA/RAID controller firmware, LAN firmware and the Intel Graphics firmware as well.
> 
> I'll do both versions, one with just the microcode and another with all the firmware updated.



Wow!

Thank im advance bro, Two versions of 1003 is superb!, im waiting.


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> Wow!
> 
> Thank in advance bro, Two versions of 1003 is superb!, I'm waiting.


Microcode Only, 1301 Maximus X Hero AC Wi-FI BIOS

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1yeTyC0sBhf0A2EzyjGU1B3O6vl7g-eVY

All modules updated, same BIOS.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1LJhZJfZbbKVz0_E2pSEmr6AepQNU5TB3

You likely want to use the all modules one. It doesn't affect the performance of the BIOS, it'll overclock just as well. It just has better support for the latest drivers etc. for the motherboard.

Doesn't affect you much if you use the drivers from the ASUS website but if you use other sources as I do to get the latest motherboard drivers the updated modules are better.


----------



## KedarWolf

scracy said:


> 16 PCI-E lanes for your graphics card (second slot from the top of board) are direct from the CPU and another 24 lanes from the PCH (chipset) for everything else including SATA ports,USB ports etc. PCH is connected to the CPU via DMI 3.0 which has the equivalent bandwidth of 4 PCI-E 3.0 lanes


Thanks peeps, good info.


----------



## wingman99

Jpmboy said:


> I'm not sure I understand the excitement about 2 more cores on this PCIE-limited platform... ?


8 cores 16 threads will benefit productivity usage like Video, blender, math calculations, any work that benefits with parallelism. Also gaming and multitasking and streaming at the same time befits with 8 core 16 threads. SLI 16X16X is a dying bread and not well supported by games and video card companies. And if you need more PCIE lanes or cores that is what the HEDT is for, not the mainstream.


----------



## swddeluxx

KedarWolf said:


> Microcode Only, 1301 Maximus X Hero AC Wi-FI BIOS
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1yeTyC0sBhf0A2EzyjGU1B3O6vl7g-eVY
> 
> All modules updated, same BIOS.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1LJhZJfZbbKVz0_E2pSEmr6AepQNU5TB3
> 
> You likely want to use the all modules one. It doesn't affect the performance of the BIOS, it'll overclock just as well. It just has better support for the latest drivers etc. for the motherboard.
> 
> Doesn't affect you much if you use the drivers from the ASUS website but if you use other sources as I do to get the latest motherboard drivers the updated modules are better.



your moded Bios is Version 1301 or *1003* ? 
Because 1301 and 1003 there are two different bios version. 
i wanted version *1003* because that is the better version for memory overclocking(Boot RTL Training is better and faster with this Bios Version, i have test it with several Memory Stick) with fast Memory (over 4133 MHz) and Temps under heavy load.
If it is possible - can you please mode the 1003 version ?, please *Kedar*.


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> your moded Bios is Version 1301 or *1003* ?
> Because 1301 and 1003 there are two different bios version.
> i wanted version *1003* because that is the better version for memory overclocking(Boot RTL Training is better and faster with this Bios Version, i have test it with several Memory Stick) with fast Memory (over 4133 MHz) and Temps under heavy load.
> If it is possible - can you please mode the 1003 version ?, please *Kedar*.


My bad, I thought you wanted 1301 as generally it's considered the best BIOS.

I'm not 100% sure 1003 has all the Spectre vulnerability fixes even with the latest microcode, you'd have to run the vulnerability checker after flashing it.

In almost home from work, will do it in a bit.


----------



## swddeluxx

KedarWolf said:


> My bad, I thought you wanted 1301 as generally it's considered the best BIOS.
> 
> I'm not 100% sure 1003 has all the Spectre vulnerability fixes even with the latest microcode, you'd have to run the vulnerability checker after flashing it.
> 
> In almost home from work, will do it in a bit.



Super!, 

im waiting, big thanks im advance Kedar!
i will check it after flashing when you are done


----------



## AMGThor

Question about the TUF Z370-PLUS GAMING. Wish I did some more research, as it seems this is not a great MB to pair with my 8700k. I bought it one week ago from microcenter, so should be able to return it if need be, but wanted to see what exactly the power phase is and if compatible.

I saw some posts of people saying its got 4 power phases, but the ASUS site mentions 6 while the manual from their website says 7, so it's not really consistent. As my first time OCing, I imagine I would need at least 6 power phase/vrm, so wanted to see if anyone could help confirm, or if there's anyway for me to check visually?

I plan on going to around 4.6, 4.8 would be great, but from reading tidbits online it seems 4.6 would be the highest for this type of


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> Super!,
> 
> im waiting, big thanks im advance Kedar!
> i will check it after flashing when you are done


https://drive.google.com/open?id=1zXp7sVYIZx7ZAupIGccl7Ri352RBkL1C 1003 Maximus X Hero WiFi AC BIOS, all firmware updated, use this one even with Asus website drivers.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1zXp7sVYIZx7ZAupIGccl7Ri352RBkL1C 1003 Maximus X Hero WiFi AC BIOS, all firmware updated, use this one even with Asus website drivers.


Hey Kedar,

Do you know if Maximus X Hero WiFi BIOS 1602 from Asus site has all of the latest microcode and firmware already baked in? I have been reading up on the Win-Raid forum and learning how to mod the BIOS file with the UBU tool and was (I think) successful in updating the microcode. But I am leery of flashing a BIOS that was modified by me when I am not sure if I did everything correctly. If it's not too much trouble, I would LOVE to have Maximus X Hero WiFi BIOS 1602 with the latest ucode and firmware inserted into it. Seems like you have the process down. Is this something that you can do easily for me? If not, no worries. If so, many thanks!

Chicken


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Hey Kedar,
> 
> Do you know if Maximus X Hero WiFi BIOS 1602 from Asus site has all of the latest microcode and firmware already baked in? I have been reading up on the Win-Raid forum and learning how to mod the BIOS file with the UBU tool and was (I think) successful in updating the microcode. But I am leery of flashing a BIOS that was modified by me when I am not sure if I did everything correctly. If it's not too much trouble, I would LOVE to have Maximus X Hero WiFi BIOS 1602 with the latest ucode and firmware inserted into it. Seems like you have the process down. Is this something that you can do easily for me? If not, no worries. If so, many thanks!
> 
> Chicken


1602 has the latest microcode and pretty sure all the other firmware is up to date as well.

Edit: The SATA/RAID firmware wasn't up to date, here you go. 1602 Maximus X Hero WiFi AC.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VGUSPznthlwpnGU_OsxmTjDQQl0yiF-z/view?usp=sharing


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> My bad, I thought you wanted 1301 as generally it's considered the best BIOS.
> 
> I'm not 100% sure 1003 has all the Spectre vulnerability fixes even with the latest microcode, you'd have to run the vulnerability checker after flashing it.
> 
> In almost home from work, will do it in a bit.



The Spectre vulnerability fixes are in the microcode, not the BIOS.
There have been security fixes to the Intel Management Engine, I am not sure which BIOS version those were included in, but they were not Spectre. 

1301 isn't the best IMO.


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> The Spectre vulnerability fixes are in the microcode, not the BIOS.
> There have been security fixes to the Intel Management Engine, I am not sure which BIOS version those were included in, but they were not Spectre.
> 
> 1301 isn't the best IMO.


I prefer 1602 myself.


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> I prefer 1602 myself.



I prefer 1101 with an earlier IME firmware (it is probably just the IME firmware that is the issue). Updating broke my memory overclock. But you can't roll back the IME firmware, so I am on 1602 and have had to adjust it quite a bit.


----------



## gammagoat

AMGThor said:


> Question about the TUF Z370-PLUS GAMING. Wish I did some more research, as it seems this is not a great MB to pair with my 8700k. I bought it one week ago from microcenter, so should be able to return it if need be, but wanted to see what exactly the power phase is and if compatible.
> 
> I saw some posts of people saying its got 4 power phases, but the ASUS site mentions 6 while the manual from their website says 7, so it's not really consistent. As my first time OCing, I imagine I would need at least 6 power phase/vrm, so wanted to see if anyone could help confirm, or if there's anyway for me to check visually?
> 
> I plan on going to around 4.6, 4.8 would be great, but from reading tidbits online it seems 4.6 would be the highest for this type of


Links in first post should provide all info you need, https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-intel-motherboards/1638955-z370-z390-vrm-discussion-thread.html

In my opinion Hero X and above. Although if you have a good 8700k sample then one of the lesser boards may do, Such as ROG Strix Z370-I Gaming.

https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/lga-1151-mainboard-vrm-liste-1175784.html#z370


----------



## gammagoat

More on Hero X VRM sensor,

I insulated the heat sink from nearly all air flow and T2 temp went above non insulated. Removing insulation while under load T2 temps went down and adding additional air flow lowered temperature even further.

So maybe? Would still like to see if others can repeat what I have experienced with my amature sleuthing.


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> I prefer 1101 with an earlier IME firmware (it is probably just the IME firmware that is the issue). Updating broke my memory overclock. But you can't roll back the IME firmware, so I am on 1602 and have had to adjust it quite a bit.


You CAN roll back the IME firmware.

You can downgrade to the 1101 firmware, then flash 1101 again.

You download the INTEL CSME 11.8 FIRMWARE REPOSITORY PACK R7 from WinRaid forums, Google it. You want the '11.8.50.3399_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin' firmware, but there were issues with it.

It would be better to go with '11.8.50.3425_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin' which is basically the same but with bug fixes that the previous one contained.

Use the 'Update Firmware' tool from Intel CSME System Tools v11 r13 - (2018-07-18) from here. https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html

Admin command prompt in the FirmwareUpdate/WIN64 folder with the firmware in it. I just copied the WIN64 folder with the firmware in it to my D: drive to make it easier.

Run 'FWUpdLcl64.exe -F 11.8.50.3425_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin' without the single quotations in the admin command prompt. 

You may get an error you need to add a flag to the command to force a downgrade, just add what they say before the '-F', I don't want to downgrade so I'm not going to run it to see the flag in case it flashes without it.

You can find what MEI firmware any BIOS has with the ME Analyzer tool, how I found 1101 MEI firmware version.


----------



## SpeedyIV

gammagoat said:


> More on Hero X VRM sensor,
> 
> I insulated the heat sink from nearly all air flow and T2 temp went above non insulated. Removing insulation while under load T2 temps went down and adding additional air flow lowered temperature even further.
> 
> So maybe? Would still like to see if others can repeat what I have experienced with my amature sleuthing.


Hi. Sorry I have not had a chance to sit down and try this yet. I am definitely going to but it will have to wait till the weekend. I will post back. I don't know how many people with Max X Hero / wifi MOBO are not getting a VRM temp reported - I suspect most since it seems like it did exist but only on some early motherboards. I guess it's just not a priority since VRM temps are not really a huge concern on this platform. It has just always bugged me that Asus quietly removed this (or maybe renamed it?) sensor. IIRC, those who did see it (identified as VRM Temp) said it was under the Asus EC section in HWINFO. I never did see a screen shot verifying the claim.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> 1602 has the latest microcode and pretty sure all the other firmware is up to date as well.
> 
> Edit: The SATA/RAID firmware wasn't up to date, here you go. 1602 Maximus X Hero WiFi AC.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VGUSPznthlwpnGU_OsxmTjDQQl0yiF-z/view?usp=sharing


Thank You Kedar. That was fast! I will load it this weekend and check it out. I need to do some more reading before I feel secure modifying a BIOS. It's not really difficult but I have some concern that I could brick the board.


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> You CAN roll back the IME firmware.
> 
> You can downgrade to the 1101 firmware, then flash 1101 again.
> 
> You download the INTEL CSME 11.8 FIRMWARE REPOSITORY PACK R7 from WinRaid forums, Google it. You want the '11.8.50.3399_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin' firmware, but there were issues with it.
> 
> It would be better to go with '11.8.50.3425_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin' which is basically the same but with bug fixes that the previous one contained.
> 
> Use the 'Update Firmware' tool from Intel CSME System Tools v11 r13 - (2018-07-18) from here. https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html
> 
> Admin command prompt in the FirmwareUpdate/WIN64 folder with the firmware in it. I just copied the WIN64 folder with the firmware in it to my D: drive to make it easier.
> 
> Run 'FWUpdLcl64.exe -F 11.8.50.3425_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin' without the single quotations in the admin command prompt.
> 
> You may get an error you need to add a flag to the command to force a downgrade, just add what they say before the '-F', I don't want to downgrade so I'm not going to run it to see the flag in case it flashes without it.
> 
> You can find what MEI firmware any BIOS has with the ME Analyzer tool, how I found 1101 MEI firmware version.



Yes, I know how to do that, but I would not do that. It is more complicated to get the vendor specific IME data area from the BIOS to restore it with the IME firmware. It isn't worth the hassle.


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> Yes, I know how to do that, but I would not do that. It is more complicated to get the vendor specific IME data area from the BIOS to restore it with the IME firmware. It isn't worth the hassle.


There's an Asus specific 11.8.50.3399 firmware update program but I don't know if the firmware is board specific.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> You CAN roll back the IME firmware.
> 
> You can downgrade to the 1101 firmware, then flash 1101 again.
> 
> You download the INTEL CSME 11.8 FIRMWARE REPOSITORY PACK R7 from WinRaid forums, Google it. You want the '11.8.50.3399_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin' firmware, but there were issues with it.
> 
> It would be better to go with '11.8.50.3425_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin' which is basically the same but with bug fixes that the previous one contained.
> 
> Use the 'Update Firmware' tool from Intel CSME System Tools v11 r13 - (2018-07-18) from here. https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html
> 
> Admin command prompt in the FirmwareUpdate/WIN64 folder with the firmware in it. I just copied the WIN64 folder with the firmware in it to my D: drive to make it easier.
> 
> Run 'FWUpdLcl64.exe -F 11.8.50.3425_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin' without the single quotations in the admin command prompt.
> 
> You may get an error you need to add a flag to the command to force a downgrade, just add what they say before the '-F', I don't want to downgrade so I'm not going to run it to see the flag in case it flashes without it.
> 
> You can find what MEI firmware any BIOS has with the ME Analyzer tool, how I found 1101 MEI firmware version.


Never mind all this, you need 3399 EXTR firmware and it can't be found anywhere.


----------



## SpeedyIV

SpeedyIV said:


> Thank You Kedar. That was fast! I will load it this weekend and check it out. I need to do some more reading before I feel secure modifying a BIOS. It's not really difficult but I have some concern that I could brick the board.


Hey Kedar - I tried to load this BIOS from a USB stick with EZ Flash 3 from within the current BIOS. It would not load this file. Message said it was not a proper BIOS. Do I have to do it from the USB Flashback port ?

Thanks


----------



## GeneO

SpeedyIV said:


> Hey Kedar - I tried to load this BIOS from a USB stick with EZ Flash 3 from within the current BIOS. It would not load this file. Message said it was not a proper BIOS. Do I have to do it from the USB Flashback port ?
> 
> Thanks



Modded BIOS fail the security test in EZ flash. You need to use flashback.


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Hey Kedar - I tried to load this BIOS from a USB stick with EZ Flash 3 from within the current BIOS. It would not load this file. Message said it was not a proper BIOS. Do I have to do it from the USB Flashback port ?
> 
> Thanks


Yes, it has to be the USB Flashback port I think.


----------



## SpeedyIV

*Thank you but now confused.*



KedarWolf said:


> Yes, it has to be the USB Flashback port I think.


Hi Kedar - Yes it worked when I did it from the BIOS Flashback USB Port. Thank you but now I find myself confused. The BIOS says it is v1602 and says ME 11.8.50.3474. I think that is correct. This is the ME Firmware version, right?

I ran MEI Analyzer v1.56.0 r130 on this modified BIOS. The last line in the chart "Firmware Latest" has a red NO in it. Out of curiosity. I also ran 2 different Spectre and Meltdown vulnerability tests (InSpectre r2 and Ashampoo SpectreMeltdownCheck 1.1.2.1). They both said not vulnerable to Meltdown but YES vulnerable to Spectre. Then for grins I loaded the stock Asus 1602 BIOS. This BIOS still listed ME version 11.8.5.3474, MEI Analyzer still has a red NO in the "Firmware Latest" box, but Spectre and Meltdown tests both came back clean (not vulnerable).

So I am confused about why MEI Analyzer shows NO for Latest Firmware, and why does the custom BIOS show Spectre vulnerability but the stock 1602 does not? I ran MEI Analyzer on stock v1602 and v1503. Both show NO for Latest Firmware (1502 did show latest firmware when I ran MEI Analyzer on it on 06-30-2018 so maybe it was latest then but not now?). I don't know how MEI Analyzer determines latest firmware but I can see where BIOS 1502 might have had latest firmware but doesn't now.

I have no doubt that you modified Asus BIOS 1602 correctly. I am just trying to understand what I am seeing. Both the stock and the modded BIOS show ME version 11.8.5.3474 so that appears to be the same. For MEI driver - If I look in Device Manager at the Intel Management Engine Interface Properties, I see driver version 11.7.0.1057. The Win-Raid link lists this version but the latest looks like v1815.12.0.2021. So it seems like neither stock or modified BIOS 1602 has latest (ME?) firmware per MEI Analyzer, and modified 1602 does not have Spectre patch. And I don't think MEI driver v11.7.0.1057 is the latest and maybe I should download Intel MEI Driver v1828.12.0.2021. Yep - I am confused.


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Hi Kedar - Yes it worked when I did it from the BIOS Flashback USB Port. Thank you but now I find myself confused. The BIOS says it is v1602 and says ME 11.8.50.3474. I think that is correct. This is the ME Firmware version, right?
> 
> I ran MEI Analyzer v1.56.0 r130 on this modified BIOS. The last line in the chart "Firmware Latest" has a red NO in it. Out of curiosity. I also ran 2 different Spectre and Meltdown vulnerability tests (InSpectre r2 and Ashampoo SpectreMeltdownCheck 1.1.2.1). They both said not vulnerable to Meltdown but YES vulnerable to Spectre. Then for grins I loaded the stock Asus 1602 BIOS. This BIOS still listed ME version 11.8.5.3474, MEI Analyzer still has a red NO in the "Firmware Latest" box, but Spectre and Meltdown tests both came back clean (not vulnerable).
> 
> So I am confused about why MEI Analyzer shows NO for Latest Firmware, and why does the custom BIOS show Spectre vulnerability but the stock 1602 does not? I ran MEI Analyzer on stock v1602 and v1503. Both show NO for Latest Firmware (1502 did show latest firmware when I ran MEI Analyzer on it on 06-30-2018 so maybe it was latest then but not now?). I don't know how MEI Analyzer determines latest firmware but I can see where BIOS 1502 might have had latest firmware but doesn't now.
> 
> I have no doubt that you modified Asus BIOS 1602 correctly. I am just trying to understand what I am seeing. Both the stock and the modded BIOS show ME version 11.8.5.3474 so that appears to be the same. For MEI driver - If I look in Device Manager at the Intel Management Engine Interface Properties, I see driver version 11.7.0.1057. The Win-Raid link lists this version but the latest looks like v1815.12.0.2021. So it seems like neither stock or modified BIOS 1602 has latest (ME?) firmware per MEI Analyzer, and modified 1602 does not have Spectre patch. And I don't think MEI driver v11.7.0.1057 is the latest and maybe I should download Intel MEI Driver v1828.12.0.2021. Yep - I am confused.


You don't update the firmware in the BIOS. There is a later version.

Download this firmware. http://www.smartredirect.de/redir/c...Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html

Download these tools. http://www.smartredirect.de/redir/c...Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html

Go to the FirmwareUpdate folder and copy the WIN64 folder to your D: drive. Put the firmware in it.

Open an admin command prompt, go to the WIN64 folder on your D: drive, run 'FWUpdLcl64.exe -F 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin' without the quotations, it'll update the firmware on your motherboard. I can't do that to your BIOS. 

Edit: You can get the latest MEI drivers here. https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html

And you may need to run the latest Windows Update Spectre patch. If your Windows is up to date you want the 1803 version.

https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/windows-10-hotfix-repository.57050/page-310#post-1452058

Second Edit: Not sure why that BIOS is saying it's Spectre vulnerable. The only modification was the latest SATA/RAID firmware. It should NOT affect the Spectre mitigation. 

Third Edit: i'm on 1602, going to save my BIOS settings, flash it and check the Spectre stuff.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> You don't update the firmware in the BIOS. There is a later version.
> 
> Download this firmware. http://www.smartredirect.de/redir/c...Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html
> 
> Download these tools. http://www.smartredirect.de/redir/c...Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html
> 
> Go to the FirmwareUpdate folder and copy the WIN64 folder to your D: drive. Put the firmware in it.
> 
> Open an admin command prompt, go to the WIN64 folder on your D: drive, run 'FWUpdLcl64.exe -F 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin' without the quotations, it'll update the firmware on your motherboard. I can't do that to your BIOS.
> 
> Edit: You can get the latest MEI drivers here. https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html
> 
> And you may need to run the latest Windows Update Spectre patch. If your Windows is up to date you want the 1803 version.
> 
> https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/windows-10-hotfix-repository.57050/page-310#post-1452058
> 
> Second Edit: Not sure why that BIOS is saying it's Spectre vulnerable. The only modification was the latest SATA/RAID firmware. It should NOT affect the Spectre mitigation.


OK think I am starting to get this. I did what you said but when I run FWUpdLcl64.exe -F 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin from the Admin command prompt it tries to do it but I get an error - Error 8714: Firmware update not initiated due to file open or read failure. Then I noticed the name of the .bin file that extracted is slightly different. It is 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin, not 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin. Note the RGN at the end verses EXTR. I downloaded an exe from Station Drivers that when extracted had 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin in it. I put this file in the Win64 directory and the firmware update worked.

I did get the latest driver from Win-Raid. That updated ok. I don't know why Spectre came up vulnerable. Both tests said the same thing. Try it if you want.

edit - I could not get the Spectre patch from My Digital Life. I think I have to resister to see it. I'll register and try it again.

Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> OK think I am starting to get this. I did what you said but when I run FWUpdLcl64.exe -F 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin from the Admin command prompt it tries to do it but I get an error - Error 8714: Firmware update not initiated due to file open or read failure. Then I noticed the name of the .bin file that extracted is slightly different. It is 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin, not 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin. Note the RGN at the end verses EXTR. I downloaded an exe from Station Drivers that when extracted had 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin in it. I put this file in the Win64 directory and the firmware update worked.
> 
> 
> 
> I did get the latest driver from Win-Raid. That updated ok. I don't know why Spectre came up vulnerable. Both tests said the same thing. Try it if you want.
> 
> edit - I could not get the Spectre patch from My Digital Life. I think I have to resister to see it. I'll register and try it again.
> 
> Thanks


Edit: Here's 1602 again with just the SATA/RAID firmware updated. Might have been an issue with the first one. 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1G0vumDuRAhr42eu84FmDIjlWTMgItyDa

Yeah, that's the wrong firmware. I don't know why they changed the download to that one.

Here though. I have the original download

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1fsC-jd7NSaYS0OhaCvxUeUuRq-YNzv5w

And I did the same SATA/RAID firmware on my Maximus X Formula BIOS, but I have the Spectre patch and latest MEI firmware.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, that's the wrong firmware. I don't know why they changed the download to that one.
> 
> Here though. I have the original download
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1fsC-jd7NSaYS0OhaCvxUeUuRq-YNzv5w
> 
> And I did the same SATA/RAID firmware on my Maximus X Formula BIOS, but I have the Spectre patch and latest MEI firmware.


Thanks again. Still trying to get the latest Spectre patch. Trying to register at My Digital Life. I put in the info and the site just sits there and does nothing. Never leaves that page or sends me a confirmation email. Maybe I can download the Spectre patch somewhere else...

Now My Digital Life thinks I am a Spam Bot. I'll fight with it some more later...

Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Thanks again. Still trying to get the latest Spectre patch. Trying to register at My Digital Life. I put in the info and the site just sits there and does nothing. Never leaves that page or sends me a confirmation email. Maybe I can download the Spectre patch somewhere else...
> 
> Now My Digital Life thinks I am a Spam Bot. I'll fight with it some more later...
> 
> Thanks



Edit: Here's 1602 again with just the SATA/RAID firmware updated. Might have been an issue with the first one. 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1G0vumDuRAhr42eu84FmDIjlWTMgItyDa

Spectre patch.

https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=kb4100347


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> Edit: Here's 1602 again with just the SATA/RAID firmware updated. Might have been an issue with the first one.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1G0vumDuRAhr42eu84FmDIjlWTMgItyDa
> 
> Spectre patch.
> 
> https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=kb4100347


Thanks Kedar. I will try these.


----------



## Scotty99

Where can i find chipset driver uninstall? I see management engine under add/remove programs list but not chispet. Asus is finally getting on the ball with this new bios, got brand new audio and chipset drivers this week for the strix-f.


----------



## Jpmboy

I'm pretty sure you can only overwrite the chipset drivers, not uninstall.


----------



## Scotty99

Jpmboy said:


> I'm pretty sure you can only overwrite the chipset drivers, not uninstall.


I kinda thought that too but under the download link asus put: 
"Intel Chipset Driver
Improve system stability & Support Windows 10 latest version.
NOTICE:
Due to the different structure for drivers, suggest you remove the old driver first before install this version driver."

Maybe thats just a standard thing they put for all drivers. I probably should do a fresh install but that doesnt sound too fun lol.


----------



## KedarWolf

Can someone with a Maximus X Formula that hasn't manually updated their MEI firmware with the Firmware Update Tool on BIOS 1602 use this tool https://www.sendspace.com/file/20hbsl and in an admin command prompt run 'fptW -d backupbios.bin' or if that gives an error 'fptw -bios -d biosbck.bin' without the quotation marks and upload it to Google Drive to share here?

We needz it.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> Edit: Here's 1602 again with just the SATA/RAID firmware updated. Might have been an issue with the first one.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1G0vumDuRAhr42eu84FmDIjlWTMgItyDa
> 
> Spectre patch.
> 
> https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=kb4100347


Hi Kedar. I flashed the new updated 1602 BIOS and it loaded fine. It also passed both Spectre and Meltdown tests, even before I ran KB4100347 again anyway. Everything looks correct, at least as best I can tell. I'm gonna go lurk somemore over at the Win-Raid forum. There is a lot (for me) to be learned there.

I did note that when I ran both of your modified BIOS files through MMTool, I get a warning that says - "There may be problems with updating the CPU microcode." although I also got the warning with the stock Asus BIOS. I need to play around with these tools some more. Thanks again!


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Hi Kedar. I flashed the new updated 1602 BIOS and it loaded fine. It also passed both Spectre and Meltdown tests, even before I ran KB4100347 again anyway. Everything looks correct, at least as best I can tell. I'm gonna go lurk somemore over at the Win-Raid forum. There is a lot (for me) to be learned there.
> 
> I did note that when I ran both of your modified BIOS files through MMTool, I get a warning that says - "There may be problems with updating the CPU microcode." although I also got the warning with the stock Asus BIOS. I need to play around with these tools some more. Thanks again!


Yes, it gives that warning in UBU Tool but I've always been able to flash microcodes no problem.

Did you update the MEI firmware? If not, let me know, I need a favour.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, it gives that warning in UBU Tool but I've always been able to flash microcodes no problem.
> 
> Did you update the MEI firmware? If not, let me know, I need a favour.


Yeah I updated the MEI Firmware. I saw your other post looking for someone with a Max X Formula, that has not been updated. My firmware is now v11.8.55.3510 as I ran the update last night. That said, if I can do anything to help you, name it and I will try. Least I can do...


----------



## KedarWolf

Anyone with an Asus Z370 motherboard on 1602 BIOS with not having used the MEI firmware update tool, can you use this tool https://www.sendspace.com/file/20hbsl and in an admin command prompt run 'fptW -d backupbios.bin' or if that gives an error 'fptw -bios -d biosbck.bin' without the quotation marks and upload it to Google Drive to share here?

We needz it.


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> Anyone with an Asus Z370 motherboard on 1602 BIOS with not having used the MEI firmware update tool, can you use this tool https://www.sendspace.com/file/20hbsl and in an admin command prompt run 'fptW -d backupbios.bin' or if that gives an error 'fptw -bios -d biosbck.bin' without the quotation marks and upload it to Google Drive to share here?
> 
> We needz it.



sorry bro - I dropped down to bios 1301 on the Apex some time ago.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Anyone with an Asus Z370 motherboard on 1602 BIOS with not having used the MEI firmware update tool, can you use this tool https://www.sendspace.com/file/20hbsl and in an admin command prompt run 'fptW -d backupbios.bin' or if that gives an error 'fptw -bios -d biosbck.bin' without the quotation marks and upload it to Google Drive to share here?
> 
> We needz it.


Is okay, I figured it out.


----------



## Nilsagard

Hello!
I updated to firmware 11.8.50.3474 on my Asus Maximus X board and now I cannot run RAM speeds above 4000mhz. I think 4000mhz is not 100% stable as well. Before update I could run 4266mhz with no problem 

Tested 11.8.55.3410 and same issue.

Where do I find ME firmwares before 11.8.50.3474?


----------



## KedarWolf

Nilsagard said:


> Hello!
> I updated to firmware 11.8.50.3474 on my Asus Maximus X board and now I cannot run RAM speeds above 4000mhz. I think 4000mhz is not 100% stable as well. Before update I could run 4266mhz with no problem
> 
> Tested 11.8.55.3410 and same issue.
> 
> Where do I find ME firmwares before 11.8.50.3474?


You need to go to https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools-268.html

See the posts before with myself downgrading my firmware. You need to Run an EFI shell command, reboot, and have the kind peeps in that thread make the firmware from the BIOS for your board you want.

You need to follow the steps here https://www.win-raid.com/t3413f16-G...ke-and-Kaby-Lake-motherboards-7.html#msg51751 to get the EFI command for your board.

The EFI shell command you run on our boards ends with 0x1 not 0x01. 


You can format a USB for FAT32 with Rufus https://rufus.akeo.ie/ and make an EFI folder on the USB and put the EFI shell in there.


----------



## Nilsagard

Oh ****... As I am not that accustomed to CMD in win, this is probably to advanced for me 

It was pretty easy to update firmware in windows environment, but do all this stuff (that I partly dont understand) was not the response I hoped for..

Anyway, I am testing to find out what have happen to my OC settings, and have found out that CPU now need at least 0.03v more for same clock. Running 5.1ghz at 1.34v (LL 6 which is like 1.37 or something) is impossible now with ME Firmware since 11.8.50.3474, 11.8.55.3510 as it bluescreen in seconds (OCCT small). 5 ghz is probably stable with 1.34 now.

Can it be that updates against specter/meltdown is creating extra load on CPU which "might" be included in the ME firmware? (Or is it cpu microcode dependent?)

Edit:
Reading some threads (Sweclockers and reddit) about updated bioses for Maximus X, and it seems like BIOS? and/or ME firmware that is included affects OC that I am experiencing now. Guess it started with ME 11.8.50.3474 which was included in bios 15xx or 16xx (did not check before all this hassle...).
Almost 1 run small FTT in OCCT done (1h), and can conclude for my 5ghz profile, that 0.03v is needed to be added (now 1,34v, before 1.31) in order to create stability. No bluescreen.

Edit 2:
Can achieve RAM speeds at 4266mhz as before, same RAM volt (1,41v), VCCIO (1,15v) and VCCSA (1,2v) - just with the added +0.03vcore. Jumped down from 5.1ghz to 5ghz. Hopefully some new BIOS and ME firmware will resove this.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Hey Kedar - I am reading up on the Win-Raid forum and stumbled upon some of your posts there talking about 11.8.50.3399_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin. As you know, I recently was able to flash 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR after some confusion about that verses 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin (EXTR verses RGN) Now I see a post from Lost-N_Bios saying "You don't want any EXTR ME Region (Unless it's from your own extraction from onboard properly running ME). Only use PRD_RGN ME files, then clean / transfer your current ME/BIOS setting to that ME following the guide to clean ME - [Guide] Clean Dumped Intel Engine (CS)ME/(CS)TXE Regions with Data Initialization>"

So did I screw up by flashing the EXTR version? I found the EXTR version on Station Drivers but you had sent me 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN. That one would not run in FWUpdLcl64.exe because the command you posted was for the EXTR version. Should I go back and do it with the RGN version? This stuff is a bit over my head and I don't want to shoot myself in the foot! 

Edit- actually reading further in the thread over there I am starting to think that flashing 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR was a mistake and what is supposed to be in there is 11.8.50.3470_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN. It also looks like regressing the firmware is a rather major pain in the butt. So do I have a problem now? Can I just go load the stock Asus 1602 BIOS? This is getting to complicated for me. I don't want to brick my board, or have to go buy a CH341A programmer.

Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Hey Kedar - I am reading up on the Win-Raid forum and stumbled upon some of your posts there talking about 11.8.50.3399_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin. As you know, I recently was able to flash 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR after some confusion about that verses 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin (EXTR verses RGN) Now I see a post from Lost-N_Bios saying "You don't want any EXTR ME Region (Unless it's from your own extraction from onboard properly running ME). Only use PRD_RGN ME files, then clean / transfer your current ME/BIOS setting to that ME following the guide to clean ME - [Guide] Clean Dumped Intel Engine (CS)ME/(CS)TXE Regions with Data Initialization>"
> 
> So did I screw up by flashing the EXTR version? I found the EXTR version on Station Drivers but you had sent me 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN. That one would not run in FWUpdLcl64.exe because the command you posted was for the EXTR version. Should I go back and do it with the RGN version? This stuff is a bit over my head and I don't want to shoot myself in the foot!
> 
> Thanks


I had no trouble with latest MEI but after reading that I flashed back to previous MEI taken from my board's BIOS.

I PM'd you about that. I can help you go back if you want, but had zero issues with latest.

I know the procedure if you do and can walk you through it.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Hey Kedar. I din not see that PM till just now. I don't see to get PM notices. Looks like I ended up reading the same advice you got over there. I'll get back to you in the PM. Don't wanna choke this thread with this. Thx


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Hey Kedar. I din not see that PM till just now. I don't see to get PM notices. Looks like I ended up reading the same advice you got over there. I'll get back to you in the PM. Don't wanna choke this thread with this. Thx


k..


----------



## MonarchX

What is all this MEI talk about? I am confused. Do recent MEI updates cause performance degradation or overclock degradation? I am on the latest and "greatest" 3510... - no issues, but then again, I am one of the unlucky ones stuck at 4.8Ghz...


----------



## KedarWolf

MonarchX said:


> What is all this MEI talk about? I am confused. Do recent MEI updates cause performance degradation or overclock degradation? I am on the latest and "greatest" 3510... - no issues, but then again, I am one of the unlucky ones stuck at 4.8Ghz...


Minor changes from earlier versions, one guy had to add .03v to get same overclock but that's a side effect of having the newest MEI.


----------



## GeneO

MonarchX said:


> What is all this MEI talk about? I am confused. Do recent MEI updates cause performance degradation or overclock degradation? I am on the latest and "greatest" 3510... - no issues, but then again, I am one of the unlucky ones stuck at 4.8Ghz...



Yes, I had to redo my memory overclock and also had to raise my vcore a bit.


I don't know how anyone but Intel can claim to know that changes from earlier versions were minor or not, since Intl doesn't disclose any information about the management engine.


----------



## SpeedyIV

That is what I am wondering myself. I just like to have things up to date in general, so I started messing around with this. I am getting confused about all of these ME firmware versions - 11.8.55.3510 vs 11.8.50.3399 vs 11.8.50.3470. What are the differences, what do I "get" when I update, which one is the right one for 8700K on Z370, and what are the implications of not having the right (maybe optimum is a better word) one?


----------



## feznz

I am wondering what intel fixed or should I say broke when they updated the IME glad I stuck to the old trusty 1101 bios


----------



## KedarWolf

feznz said:


> I am wondering what intel fixed or should I say broke when they updated the IME glad I stuck to the old trusty 1101 bios


If anyone wants to go back to an earlier BIOS and MEI flashing it in EZFlash or USB Flashback WON'T downgrade the MEI, just the BIOS.

But if you have intermediate computer skills I can guide through the process on how to go back to an earlier MEI version and therefore an earlier BIOS.

It's kinda complex and tricky but can be done.

PM me if you want to do that. :h34r-smi


----------



## feznz

KedarWolf said:


> If anyone wants to go back to an earlier BIOS and MEI flashing it in EZFlash or USB Flashback WON'T downgrade the MEI, just the BIOS.
> 
> But if you have intermediate computer skills I can guide through the process on how to go back to an earlier MEI version and therefore an earlier BIOS.
> 
> It's kinda complex and tricky but can be done.
> 
> PM me if you want to do that. :h34r-smi



The Intel risk assement tool says I am still on IME 11.8.50.3399

Just don't understand what they changed the IME and the most important why it has caused slight instabilities if there was a need to update the IME I am confused
Just I had wondered if it has been the cause of a slightly more voltage needed for the 5.4Ghz OC that needed 1.412v at the start and it started to show signs of instability WHEA errors started to appear after 6 months
but that doesn't matter I clocked down to 5.2 as that only takes 1.36v I had put it down to degradion but I am told it technically is impossible for a CPU to degrade.
I not sure but I think I will sit on the fence with a sainer 1.36v


But thanks for the offer of help I avoided the need to by lisening to GeneO when 1601 Bios was released


----------



## KedarWolf

feznz said:


> The Intel risk assement tool says I am still on IME 11.8.50.3399
> 
> Just don't understand what they changed the IME and the most important why it has caused slight instabilities if there was a need to update the IME I am confused
> Just I had wondered if it has been the cause of a slightly more voltage needed for the 5.4Ghz OC that needed 1.412v at the start and it started to show signs of instability WHEA errors started to appear after 6 months
> but that doesn't matter I clocked down to 5.2 as that only takes 1.36v I had put it down to degradion but I am told it technically is impossible for a CPU to degrade.
> I not sure but I think I will sit on the fence with a sainer 1.36v
> 
> 
> But thanks for the offer of help I avoided the need to by lisening to GeneO when 1601 Bios was released


CPU's can degrade running higher voltages. My old 5960x needed increased voltages for the same 24/7 overclocks but likely because I did some benchmarking runs with voltages rather high. 

If you're running voltages that are near or above what is generally recommended you risk having some CPU degradation.


----------



## GeneO

feznz said:


> The Intel risk assement tool says I am still on IME 11.8.50.3399
> 
> Just don't understand what they changed the IME and the most important why it has caused slight instabilities if there was a need to update the IME I am confused
> Just I had wondered if it has been the cause of a slightly more voltage needed for the 5.4Ghz OC that needed 1.412v at the start and it started to show signs of instability WHEA errors started to appear after 6 months
> but that doesn't matter I clocked down to 5.2 as that only takes 1.36v I had put it down to degradion but I am told it technically is impossible for a CPU to degrade.
> I not sure but I think I will sit on the fence with a sainer 1.36v
> 
> 
> But thanks for the offer of help I avoided the need to by lisening to GeneO when 1601 Bios was released



CPUs degrade with wear just like everything else. CPUs are degrading all of the time through a process called electromigration. When running within the design parameters of the chip, this degradation is so slow the CPU can last many years without damage. When you overclock, the heat and higher current accelerates this process significantly. The more heat and current (voltage) the faster the degradation. What is happening is that the electrons flowing through the conductive strips in the chip can dislocate the atoms of the conductor; eventually enough can get displaced that the conductor quits conducting or the migrated metallic atoms create a short to an adjacent conductor. As you can imagine, higher current and heat accelerates this process. 



Anyhow you probably aren't seeing this.


----------



## swddeluxx

KedarWolf said:


> If anyone wants to go back to an earlier BIOS and MEI flashing it in EZFlash or USB Flashback WON'T downgrade the MEI, just the BIOS.
> 
> But *if you have intermediate computer skills I can guide through the process on how to go back to an earlier MEI version and therefore an earlier BIOS.*
> 
> It's kinda complex and tricky but can be done.
> 
> PM me if you want to do that. :h34r-smi




I want that !, can you explain it for me Kedar?


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> I want that !, can you explain it for me Kedar?


Can you tell me what motherboard you have and what BIOS you want?

Edit: And what BIOS you are using now?


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> If anyone wants to go back to an earlier BIOS and MEI flashing it in EZFlash or USB Flashback WON'T downgrade the MEI, just the BIOS.
> 
> But if you have intermediate computer skills I can guide through the process on how to go back to an earlier MEI version and therefore an earlier BIOS.
> 
> It's kinda complex and tricky but can be done.
> 
> PM me if you want to do that. :h34r-smi


I might not be able to do this for you peeps. Making the firmware to downgrade takes advanced PC skills, beyond what I can do myself, and the peeps in the forum I was relying on to make it for me are now saying unless I do it myself I'm SOL.


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> I might not be able to do this for you peeps. Making the firmware to downgrade takes advanced PC skills, beyond what I can do myself, and the peeps in the forum I was relying on to make it for me are now saying unless I do it myself I'm SOL.



Exactly,. Maybe peeps shouldn't blindly upgrade IME firmware unless there is a very good reason to. (like a critical security patch).


----------



## DerekAz

I'm about ready to install Windows and fire up a new build, MaxXHero\8086, should I install the newest bios before or wait until after Windows is installed and it's booted at least once. From my reading of the manual you can install bios with PC off.

Thanks

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## KedarWolf

DerekAz said:


> I'm about ready to install Windows and fire up a new build, MaxXHero\8086, should I install the newest bios before or wait until after Windows is installed and it's booted at least once. From my reading of the manual you can install bios with PC off.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Some things to consider. If you install the latest BIOS you get the latest MEI and can't downgrade. People are getting better more stable overclocks with the 1101 and 1301 BIOS's, so you might want to try them first.

I'd flash the BIOS you want before installing Windows. :h34r-smi

Edit: And if you do decide to flash 1602 for the latest BIOS flash it in EZ Flash from booting into the BIOS first so it updates the MEI.


----------



## DerekAz

KedarWolf said:


> Some things to consider. If you install the latest BIOS you get the latest MEI and can't downgrade. People are getting better more stable overclocks with the 1101 and 1301 BIOS's, so you might want to try them first.
> 
> I'd flash the BIOS you want before installing Windows. :h34r-smi
> 
> Edit: And if you do decide to flash 1602 for the latest BIOS flash it in EZ Flash from booting into the BIOS first so it updates the MEI.


I guess maybe I'll be best off just going with whatever bios is there off the shelf. Then once I see what's inside I'll just make my decision. I just wasn't sure if there was any benefit to installing the latest with the fresh Windows install.

Thanks

Just a guy trying to avoid the cow pies of life.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> sorry bro - I dropped down to bios 1301 on the Apex some time ago.


 @Jpmboy

You think these Trident Z 4x8GB 17-17-17-34 DDR4-3733 https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3733c17q-32gtzkk would be binned better than the 4x8GB Trident Z CL16 3600 or the CL14 3200?


----------



## KedarWolf

Here's my finding with old MEI and BIOS a new.

1602 to be stable in RealBench at 5.1GHZ CPU/5.0 cache I need 1.37v.

Same with old MEI and BIOS 1101 with old microcode I need 1.355v. 

Haven't tried updating the microcode to the latest though.


----------



## feznz

KedarWolf said:


> Here's my finding with old MEI and BIOS a new.
> 
> 1602 to be stable in RealBench at 5.1GHZ CPU/5.0 cache I need 1.37v.
> 
> Same with old MEI and BIOS 1101 with old microcode I need 1.355v.
> 
> Haven't tried updating the microcode to the latest though.



Intel Management Engine 


But thats about what I found too between 1101 and 1301 so I stuck with 1101 not sure why the need for 2 new bios.


But on the other news front a smell another Asus bios update if gigabyte are going to support 9xxx series CPUs on Z370 platform
https://www.pcworld.com/article/3295005/computers/gigabyte-intel-9000-series-cpus-motherboards.html


----------



## encrypted11

It already does with the 906EC CPUID support and probably the ME update.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...9-Support-for-Maximus-X-amp-Strix-Z370-Boards


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> Some things to consider. If you install the latest BIOS you get the latest MEI and can't downgrade.



You can use flashback to upgrade the BIOS without upgrading IME.


----------



## swddeluxx

KedarWolf said:


> Can you tell me what motherboard you have and what BIOS you want?
> 
> Edit: And what BIOS you are using now?



Hi *KedarWolf*

I have there one of main Z370 Boards = Asus Maximus X Hero with 1602 Bios and will downgrade to *1003* Bios with old ME.
It would be nice if you could teach me how to do it myself


----------



## Nilsagard

I just downgraded to BIOS 1101 - still with new ME.
Could lower my vcore to 1.32v for 5.1ghz core/4.8ghz cache (which will be like 1.34v with LLC6). "Before" with newest bios (14xx and forward) I need around 1.37vcore for same speed...

Getting same Cinebench score with all bioses, same AIDA64 results.

Think I stick to 1101


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> Hi *KedarWolf*
> 
> I have there one of main Z370 Boards = Asus Maximus X Hero with 1602 Bios and will downgrade to *1003* Bios with old ME.
> It would be nice if you could teach me how to do it myself


It's really complicated to make the MEI firmware to downgrade. Takes advanced PC skills. I'm having someone teach me how soon though. And on 1003 I'd need to upgrade the microcode. I don't think 1003 had Spectre exploits patched.

The rest after making the MEI patch is easy though, when I'm ready I'll let you know.


----------



## GeneO

Not as simple as you originally thought, hmm.


----------



## swddeluxx

KedarWolf said:


> It's really complicated to make the MEI firmware to downgrade. Takes advanced PC skills. I'm having someone teach me how soon though. And on 1003 I'd need to upgrade the microcode. I don't think 1003 had Spectre exploits patched.
> 
> The rest after making the MEI patch is easy though, when I'm ready I'll let you know.



I'm ready and waiting for you Kedar


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> I'm ready and waiting for you Kedar


If someone is getting a better OC with lower voltages on the 1101 BIOS without downgrading the MEI it might be the microcode version. I could downgrade the microcode on the 1602 BIOS to the 1101 version if anyone wants to try it. And I'll update the driver firmware while I'm at it.


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> Not as simple as you originally thought, hmm.


Yes, Gene, we all are learning new things all the time and mistakes can be made along the way. PC stuff, even life is like that.


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> I'm ready and waiting for you Kedar


I can upgrade the microcode to the latest version, 96, or the 1101 version, 84. Both are Spectre safe. Still waiting on my other forum guy to find time to teach me how to make the MEI flash ROM. Unfortunately, some of us have a life other then these forums and time is valuable. Lucky I don't suffer from that issue.


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> swddeluxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm ready and waiting for you Kedar /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> I can upgrade the microcode to the latest version, 96, or the 1101 version, 84. Both are Spectre safe. Still waiting on my other forum guy to find time to teach me how to make the MEI flash ROM. Unfortunately, some of us have a life other then these forums and time is valuable. Lucky I don't suffer from that issue. /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif
Click to expand...

96 protects against a Spectre variant that 84 does not, though the Windows 10 code that uses the microcode to do the protection for this newer variant is disabled by default.


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> swddeluxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm ready and waiting for you Kedar /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> If someone is getting a better OC with lower voltages on the 1101 BIOS without downgrading the MEI it might be the microcode version. I could downgrade the microcode on the 1602 BIOS to the 1101 version if anyone wants to try it. And I'll update the driver firmware while I'm at it. /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
Click to expand...

Been there. It is the IME firmware.


----------



## KedarWolf

Okay peeps, downgrading the firmware is easier then I thought.

*Note, all the commands etc. remove the quotation marks.*

Download the latest UBU Tool and modded MMTool here. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1s2KNNSaNhzc3OY-7W6fB0PcjmIRGHJMc

Put the unzipped Patched MMTool in your extracted UBUTools folder. Put the BIOS you want the MEI from in the UBU Tools folder and right click on ubu.bat and *'Run As Admin'*

It'll find the BIOS and you can update the microcode from here. the microcode is in the Files/Intel/mCode folder in the UBU Tools folder. You get the latest RAID and SATA firmware from here and put in the Files/Intel/RST folder. You can update the Ethernet firmware but I'd pass on the GOP firmware, had issues with it. 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1A_F78ZwWX9QcdVjentkiXX51chnJaDwi

https://drive.google.com/open?id=16phhXciU_Wp0R-qkOy-xbeKcNdBb-D6H

Then you exit out of UBU Tool pressing 0 and 0 to make a *'bios.bin'*

Next, make a USB that's FAT32 with no boot files on it and put the EFI folder on it from this download. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1uK_x4WJFJwxjq0qdIV7ALSvN98GOHL5o

Boot from the USB in UEFI, type in the EFI shell *'setup_var 0x705 0x1'* without the quotations. Hit Enter, then CTRL ALT DEL to reboot. You'll hear the BIOS reset as it reboots. It'll take longer to reboot.

In Windows, download 'CSME Intel System Tools v11 r14+. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1LjtSGxOewFz0x4ZDrVWxxGoSmhPqcjfj

Copy the WIN32 folder from the Flash Programming Tool folder to your D: drive. Put the bios.bin you made in it.

The open an admin command prompt and go to the D:\WIN32 folder and run this command once again without the quotation marks. *'fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin'*

Next without rebooting run *'fptw -greset'*. It'll reboot after you run the command.

After it reboots you can check your MEI firmware is downgraded by copying the WIN64 folder from the FWUpdate folder in the CSME tools folder to your D: drive, admin command prompt to *D:\WIN64* and run *'FWUpdLcl64.exe -fwver'* If for any reason you get an error message that it's not found or anything try running *'fptw -greset'* again from the *D:\WIN32* folder.

*Oh, and I forgot to add to change the bios.bin back to the M10H.CAP or the .CAP file type for your motherboard run ubu.bat as admin again, choose 0, then 1 to rename it to the BIOS Flashback .CAP file for your board, done!!

Then flash the BIOS you flashed the MEI from and you're fully back on that BIOS.*


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> Been there. It is the IME firmware.


Thanks, Gene, if it's the MEI firmware that is the issue then maybe the latest microcode is okay to use.


----------



## KedarWolf

A new version of BIOS 1602 out. I checked, has microcode updates for 9000 series CPU's. :h34r-smi


----------



## encrypted11

KedarWolf said:


> A new version of BIOS 1602 out. I checked, has microcode updates for 9000 series CPU's. :h34r-smi


As far as I can tell, the checksums match. I've had a copy of the "old" 1602

They're the exact BIOS with a slightly more accurate description of the change. A reupload of the same file just for formality.


----------



## encrypted11

Additional comments from Raja, hehe. :specool:


----------



## KedarWolf

encrypted11 said:


> As far as I can tell, the checksums match. I've had a copy of the "old" 1602
> 
> They're the exact BIOS with a slightly more accurate description of the change. A reupload of the same file just for formality.


I have both versions at home. Haven't checked the microcode in the old version. And yes, I'm going to utter that terrible four letter word, I'm going to check the microcode in old version when I get home from 'work'.


----------



## KedarWolf

Welp, kind peeps. I'm going to put to rest what is causing the overclocking problems with various BIOS's.

I've tested the 1101 BIOS with the old MEI firmware, takes 1.335v to be stable at 5.1GHZ on my 8700k. Next, I'm going to mod the 1101 BIOS to the latest 96 microcode, test it after, see what it takes.

I know the 1602 BIOS takes 1.37v for the same overclock. But I'm going to flash it, then downgrade the MEI to the 1101 BIOS version, see if I still need 1.37v, and then downgrade the MEI AND microcode to the 1101 BIOS version, test it again. :h34r-smi

I want to see if it's the microcode, MEI, both or just changes to the BIOS itself that is causing the issues. 

And yes, because of BSOD's I'm sure to incur testing, I have a Windows 1803 ISO with all the updates integrated into it to reinstall Windows when I'm done. 

I have it down to a fine art. :drum:

To completely install Windows, configure services, remove Windows apps I don't need, completely configure the O/S with all my settings with BoostSpeed 10 and Control Panel I can do in less than an hour with some automated PowerShell scripts and stuff. 

Edit: And I'll likely try the 1101 BIOS lastly but with the latest MEI firmware and microcode, see if i can still do 1.355v.


----------



## encrypted11

KedarWolf said:


> I have both versions at home. Haven't checked the microcode in the old version. And yes, I'm going to utter that terrible four letter word, I'm going to check the microcode in old version when I get home from 'work'.


Well you've been stitching IMEs and BIOses to different revisions, leaving no rocks unturned I guess


----------



## GAN77

KedarWolf said:


> I've tested the 1101 BIOS with the old MEI firmware, takes 1.335v to be stable at 5.1GHZ on my 8700k. Next, I'm going to mod the 1101 BIOS to the latest 96 microcode, test it after, see what it takes.


Hello!

This is probably not the last microcode.

I updated the microcode last UBU_v1_70_rc4


----------



## KedarWolf

GAN77 said:


> Hello!
> 
> This is probably not the last microcode.
> 
> I updated the microcode last UBU_v1_70_rc4


The 96 version is the current microcode for an 8700k.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Kedar you are going to be a busy bee!! I wish I had the time you have to put into this kind of thing. 

I see it turns out that flashing any ME firmware - newer or older - is actually quite simple. And apparently you can even mod the BIOS to include ME FW Image Re-Flash > Enable. That is a bit more involved and I see that you were able to successfully do that too. But I am wondering how and where this newly enabled feature shows up in the modified Bios. Does the option now appear on one of the menus, with a switch for Enable/Disable ME Image Re-Flash? And if you Enable it, what happens? Does it flash whatever ME firmware is in that Bios during the next boot?

From what I have gathered, it seems that 

1 - ME firmware can be flashed completely independently from flashing a Bios
2 - ME Firmware can be included in a Bios, and you can pull it out of one Bios and inject it into another
2 - Flashing a different Bios will not necessarily cause the ME to be updated
4 - You can modify a bios to Enable ME Re-Flash

So if different Bios versions have different ME Firmware embedded in them, but flashing that Bios does not update the ME firmware with the version contained in that new Bios, then what is the point of putting ME firmware in the Bios in the first place?

Whatever the case, I think that when you are done you are going to end up with the best Bios with the best uCode, and the best ME Firmware for overclocking 8700K on Asus Z370 Max X Hero, and then make those results available here. That is a cool thing and I hope it works out. I still get confused about all of this but like you, I am learning. Thanks for all your efforts.


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Kedar you are going to be a busy bee!! I wish I had the time you have to put into this kind of thing.
> 
> I see it turns out that flashing any ME firmware - newer or older - is actually quite simple. And apparently you can even mod the BIOS to include ME FW Image Re-Flash > Enable. That is a bit more involved and I see that you were able to successfully do that too. But I am wondering how and where this newly enabled feature shows up in the modified Bios. Does the option now appear on one of the menus, with a switch for Enable/Disable ME Image Re-Flash? And if you Enable it, what happens? Does it flash whatever ME firmware is in that Bios during the next boot?
> 
> From what I have gathered, it seems that
> 
> 1 - ME firmware can be flashed completely independently from flashing a Bios
> 2 - ME Firmware can be included in a Bios, and you can pull it out of one Bios and inject it into another
> 2 - Flashing a different Bios will not necessarily cause the ME to be updated
> 4 - You can modify a bios to Enable ME Re-Flash
> 
> So if different Bios versions have different ME Firmware embedded in them, but flashing that Bios does not update the ME firmware with the version contained in that new Bios, then what is the point of putting ME firmware in the Bios in the first place?
> 
> Whatever the case, I think that when you are done you are going to end up with the best Bios with the best uCode, and the best ME Firmware for overclocking 8700K on Asus Z370 Max X Hero, and then make those results available here. That is a cool thing and I hope it works out. I still get confused about all of this but like you, I am learning. Thanks for all your efforts.


It just lets you flash the MEI without having to boot into the EFI shell and do the 'setup_vat 0x705 0x1' command beforehand. 

And no, there is no BIOS option or way to know it's enabled without using the UEFITool and other steps to check in the BIOS .CAP file itself. When I prepare the BIOS I go back into UEFITool, extract the header, extract a .txt file from it and make sure it's enabled.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> It just lets you flash the MEI without having to boot into the EFI shell and do the 'setup_vat 0x705 0x1' command beforehand.
> 
> And no, there is no BIOS option or way to know it's enabled without using the UEFITool and other steps to check in the BIOS .CAP file itself. When I prepare the BIOS I go back into UEFITool, extract the header, extract a .txt file from it and make sure it's enabled.


OK now I understand what the Enable Re-Flash does. It just eliminates the steps of booting into EFI shell and typing setup_var 0x705 0x1, which I think does the same thing (enables the Re-Flash). What I don't understand now is if booting into EFI Shell is required, then how was I able to flash 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR without booting into EFI Shell and typing setup_var 0x705 0x1? I did everything outlined in your post above except the booting into EFI Shell steps. As soon as I ran fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin, it flashed the MEI firmware.

Seems like every time I get an answer, I have another question! I promise not to pester you. I am curious about the above. That said, I am going to let you do your thing, which will hopefully end up with identifying the best combination of Bios, uCode, and ME Firmware.

Thank again Kedar.


----------



## GAN77

KedarWolf said:


> The 96 version is the current microcode for an 8700k.


You're right. I'm a little confused.


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> OK now I understand what the Enable Re-Flash does. It just eliminates the steps of booting into EFI shell and typing setup_var 0x705 0x1, which I think does the same thing (enables the Re-Flash). What I don't understand now is if booting into EFI Shell is required, then how was I able to flash 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR without booting into EFI Shell and typing setup_var 0x705 0x1? I did everything outlined in your post above except the booting into EFI Shell steps. As soon as I ran fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin, it flashed the MEI firmware.
> 
> Seems like every time I get an answer, I have another question! I promise not to pester you. I am curious about the above. That said, I am going to let you do your thing, which will hopefully end up with identifying the best combination of Bios, uCode, and ME Firmware.
> 
> Thank again Kedar.


Did you get an error message or did it show progress to 100% and flash without the EFI command? I get an 'Unable to write to BIOS.' error message or something like that unless I run the EFI shell command or mod the BIOS first to enable Re-Flash.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> Did you get an error message or did it show progress to 100% and flash without the EFI command? I get an 'Unable to write to BIOS.' error message or something like that unless I run the EFI shell command or mod the BIOS first to enable Re-Flash.


Hmmm. Maybe after all that, the ME flash did not complete. I need to go back and clean things up. I have a bunch of BIOS.bin files floating around from various attempts. Every one I copy into Win64 directory and run FWUpdLcl64.exe -fwver on says FW Version 11.8.55.3510 which I was I trying to flash at that time. This just tells me its in the .bin file but does not mean the actual ME Flash completed, right? IIRC, I can boot into the Bios and see what ME firmware is listed there. I can't do that now as I am doing this over a remote link (from work). Is there an easy way to verify what ME firmware is actually loaded with a utility that runs within Windows or from a command prompt? Otherwise I will just check the Bios when I am physically there.


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Hmmm. Maybe after all that, the ME flash did not complete. I need to go back and clean things up. I have a bunch of BIOS.bin files floating around from various attempts. Every one I copy into Win64 directory and run FWUpdLcl64.exe -fwver on says FW Version 11.8.55.3510 which I was I trying to flash at that time. This just tells me its in the .bin file but does not mean the actual ME Flash completed, right? IIRC, I can boot into the Bios and see what ME firmware is listed there. I can't do that now as I am doing this over a remote link (from work). Is there an easy way to verify what ME firmware is actually loaded with a utility that runs within Windows or from a command prompt? Otherwise I will just check the Bios when I am physically there.


Make the bios.bin from the older BIOS .CAP file you download from Asus Support in UBU Tool like in earlier post.

You do the EFI shell thing first though.

Next, make a USB that's FAT32 with no boot files on it and put the EFI folder on it from this download.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1uK...7ALSvN98GOHL5o

Boot from the USB in UEFI, type in the EFI shell 'setup_var 0x705 0x1' without the quotations. Hit CTRL ALT DEL to reboot. You'll hear the BIOS reset as it reboots.

In Windows, download 'CSME Intel System Tools v11 r14+. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eiuS7sx-nl1uKP9jQvWMjrLIfX1dUXQx

Copy the WIN32 folder from the Flash Programming Tool folder to your D: drive. Put the bios.bin in it. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1lT...T9xE1Mykteyyqn

The open an admin command prompt and go to the D:\WIN32 folder and run this command once again without the quotation marks. 'fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin'

Next without rebooting run 'fptw -greset'. It'll reboot after you run the command.


Oh, and I forgot to add to change the bios.bin back to the M10H.CAP or the .CAP file type for your motherboard run ubu.bat as admin again, choose 0, then 1 to rename it to the BIOS Flashback .CAP file for your board, done!!


----------



## GeneO

Or you can go to the bios which displays the ime firmware revision.


----------



## wingman99

GeneO said:


> Been there. It is the IME firmware.


How did you do a quote within a quote?


----------



## SpeedyIV

GeneO said:


> Or you can go to the bios which displays the ime firmware revision.


Yes I can do that but I can't do it when I am linking to the machine over TeamViewer. I'll check it when I get home.

Thanks


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> Did you get an error message or did it show progress to 100% and flash without the EFI command? I get an 'Unable to write to BIOS.' error message or something like that unless I run the EFI shell command or mod the BIOS first to enable Re-Flash.


I came home and booted into the Bios. It shows ME Firmware version 11.8.55.3510. I also ran MEInfoWin64.exe from an elevated command prompt, which I think I am using properly. The output also shows ME v11.8.55.3510 so the ME Firmware flash seems to have worked, and I most definitely did not ever setup a USB stick and boot into EFI Shell and type setup_var 0x705 0x1. IIRC. IIRC, the first time I tried it I got a write error but the 2nd time it seemed to complete. I have attached a Bios shot and a snip of the MEInfoWin64.exe output. Best I can tell, the ME flash did work. I guess I could try it again with an earlier version but at this point I think I am just going to leave it there and see what happens with your testing.


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> I came home and booted into the Bios. It shows ME Firmware version 11.8.55.3510. I also ran MEInfoWin64.exe from an elevated command prompt, which I think I am using properly. The output also shows ME v11.8.55.3510 so the ME Firmware flash seems to have worked, and I most definitely did not ever setup a USB stick and boot into EFI Shell and type setup_var 0x705 0x1. IIRC. IIRC, the first time I tried it I got a write error but the 2nd time it seemed to complete. I have attached a Bios shot and a snip of the MEInfoWin64.exe output. Best I can tell, the ME flash did work. I guess I could try it again with an earlier version but at this point I think I am just going to leave it there and see what happens with your testing.


If you did 'fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin' and 'fptw -greset' and you used the 1602 BIOS to make the bios.bin you'd see this '11.8.50.3470'.

If you used 1101 BIOS you see '11.8.50.3399' so no, it never flashed.


----------



## KedarWolf

*MEI AND Microcode Testing Results, 1101 BIOS and 1602 BIOS.*

1602 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.37v for 5.1GHZ CPU/ 4.9GHZ cache.
1602 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.355v.
1101 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.358v
1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.353v.
1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and older '84' microcode. 1.353v.

How I tested was with cache and memory settings on what I had tested last night as 200% HCI MemTest stable.

I ran RealBench 2.56 with 16GB of RAM, half of my 32GB for 15 minutes, if no BSOD, it passed.

Because the 96 microcode has the latest Spectre mitigation if you apply a Microsoft update patch manually which I already have, I'm now running 1101 on older '11.8.50.3399' MEI firmware with the 96 microcode.


----------



## bl4ckdot

KedarWolf said:


> 1602 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.37v for 5.1GHZ CPU/ 4.9GHZ cache.
> 1602 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.355v.
> 1101 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.358v
> 1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.353v.
> 1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and older '84' microcode. 1.353v.
> 
> How I tested was with cache and memory settings on what I had tested last night as 200% HCI MemTest stable.
> 
> I ran RealBench 2.56 with 16GB of RAM, half of my 32GB for 15 minutes, if no BSOD, it passed.
> 
> Because the 96 microcode has the latest Spectre mitigation if you apply a Microsoft update patch manually which I already have, I'm now running 1101 on older '11.8.50.3399' MEI firmware with the 96 microcode.



Interesting. Did you tried v11.8.55.3510 yet ? I'm on 11.8.50.3474 with 1602 and latest '96' microcode.


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> 1602 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.37v for 5.1GHZ CPU/ 4.9GHZ cache.
> 1602 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.355v.
> 1101 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.358v
> 1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.353v.
> 1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and older '84' microcode. 1.353v.
> 
> How I tested was with cache and memory settings on what I had tested last night as 200% HCI MemTest stable.
> 
> I ran RealBench 2.56 with 16GB of RAM, half of my 32GB for 15 minutes, if no BSOD, it passed.
> 
> Because the 96 microcode has the latest Spectre mitigation if you apply a Microsoft update patch manually which I already have, I'm now running 1101 on older '11.8.50.3399' MEI firmware with the 96 microcode.


Looks good! Serious work went into collecting that data! 

So... unless those are DMM readouts, the vcore is essentially the same across all combinations for the last 4. the top 1602 (@ 1.37V) is only 12mV higher. Were there any "real" differences in the peak core or package temperatures? Any performance difference? (realbench x264 or something?)


----------



## swddeluxx

Hmmm, what a ….. 

i have make one 1003 Bios for my Asus Maximus X Hero Board with latest 96 Microcode (M10H.CAP) but 
it will no flash it!, it will say "Not a proper BIOS ……", i tried Flashback USB Feature to flash it but does not work either…. 
What a hell is that?


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> If you did 'fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin' and 'fptw -greset' and you used the 1602 BIOS to make the bios.bin you'd see this '11.8.50.3470'.
> 
> If you used 1101 BIOS you see '11.8.50.3399' so no, it never flashed.


I understand what you are saying but how else would 11.8.55.3510 firmware end up in there? I did exactly what you said in this post

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...official-support-thread-119.html#post27553864

"Go to the FirmwareUpdate folder and copy the WIN64 folder to your D: drive. Put the firmware in it.

Open an admin command prompt, go to the WIN64 folder on your D: drive, run 'FWUpdLcl64.exe -F 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin' without the quotations, it'll update the firmware on your motherboard."

So I did this but it would not flash 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin. So I went and downloaded 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR and it completed the flash. There is no other way that 11.8.55.3510 is showing up in the Bios. So this method of flashing ME firmware seems to work, and does not involve booting into EFI Shell. Now I don't know if this would work for regressing the ME firmware, which seems to be a different animal - I have not tried an earlier version with this method. 

Note that this is different than 'fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin' and 'fptw -greset', which I think is part of the process of pulling the desired version of ME firmware out of 1 Bios and injecting it into another. I still do not understand the reason one would do this since the ME firmware embedded in a Bios does not cause that ME firmware to be flashed when the Bios is flashed. If it did, I could just flash stock 1602, and end up with whatever ME firmware is embedded in that Bios, which according to ME Analyzer is 11.8.50.3470.

I am still missing something in my understanding of all of this so I guess its time for some more lurking at the other forum. HA! Anytime I start feeling like I know a lot about computers, all I have to do is head over there. Those guys are SCARY!

Anyway, I will keep reading and trying to understand, because time spent learning is never wasted.

Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> Hmmm, what a …..
> 
> i have make one 1003 Bios for my Asus Maximus X Hero Board with latest 96 Microcode (M10H.CAP) but
> it will no flash it!, it will say "Not a proper BIOS ……", i tried Flashback USB Feature to flash it but does not work either….
> What a hell is that?


For USB Flashback you need to rename it to M10H.CAP

Wait, you did that. Is your USB FAT32?

In UBU Tool after you add the microcode press 0, then 1, let it make the .CAP file.

And is your board the Wi-Fi AC board?


----------



## swddeluxx

KedarWolf said:


> For USB Flashback you need to rename it to M10H.CAP
> 
> Wait, you did that. Is your USB FAT32?



Yes the Bios File is renamed to M10H.CAP 
my USB Stick is formatted to FAT32
and YES u have do it at another Asus Maximus X Hero Board with no problem but now it will 
not flash it and say me anytime "this File is not a proper BIOS"!
What the Problem is that?


----------



## swddeluxx

Main Board is Asus Maximus X Hero, 
Normal Hero without WiFi!
In UBU Tool i have:

Choice 5 (for Microcode)
than C for (Create FFS with MicroCodes)
than U for Udate
than 0 for comming in to Main Menu
than 1 for Rename to M10H.CAP


----------



## CRJ84

KedarWolf said:


> 1602 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.37v for 5.1GHZ CPU/ 4.9GHZ cache.
> 1602 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.355v.
> 1101 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.358v
> 1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.353v.
> 1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and older '84' microcode. 1.353v.
> 
> How I tested was with cache and memory settings on what I had tested last night as 200% HCI MemTest stable.
> 
> I ran RealBench 2.56 with 16GB of RAM, half of my 32GB for 15 minutes, if no BSOD, it passed.
> 
> Because the 96 microcode has the latest Spectre mitigation if you apply a Microsoft update patch manually which I already have, I'm now running 1101 on older '11.8.50.3399' MEI firmware with the 96 microcode.


GJ nice results! Can you post a download link for that MEI version 11.8.50.3399?


----------



## wingman99

KedarWolf said:


> 1602 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.37v for 5.1GHZ CPU/ 4.9GHZ cache.
> 1602 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.355v.
> 1101 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.358v
> 1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.353v.
> 1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and older '84' microcode. 1.353v.
> 
> How I tested was with cache and memory settings on what I had tested last night as 200% HCI MemTest stable.
> 
> I ran RealBench 2.56 with 16GB of RAM, half of my 32GB for 15 minutes, if no BSOD, it passed.
> 
> Because the 96 microcode has the latest Spectre mitigation if you apply a Microsoft update patch manually which I already have, I'm now running 1101 on older '11.8.50.3399' MEI firmware with the 96 microcode.


What I'm wondering is if the latest MEI is better Benchmark scores requiring increased Vcore?


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> I understand what you are saying but how else would 11.8.55.3510 firmware end up in there? I did exactly what you said in this post
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...official-support-thread-119.html#post27553864
> 
> "Go to the FirmwareUpdate folder and copy the WIN64 folder to your D: drive. Put the firmware in it.
> 
> Open an admin command prompt, go to the WIN64 folder on your D: drive, run 'FWUpdLcl64.exe -F 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR.bin' without the quotations, it'll update the firmware on your motherboard."
> 
> So I did this but it would not flash 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin. So I went and downloaded 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR and it completed the flash. There is no other way that 11.8.55.3510 is showing up in the Bios. So this method of flashing ME firmware seems to work, and does not involve booting into EFI Shell. Now I don't know if this would work for regressing the ME firmware, which seems to be a different animal - I have not tried an earlier version with this method.
> 
> Note that this is different than 'fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin' and 'fptw -greset', which I think is part of the process of pulling the desired version of ME firmware out of 1 Bios and injecting it into another. I still do not understand the reason one would do this since the ME firmware embedded in a Bios does not cause that ME firmware to be flashed when the Bios is flashed. If it did, I could just flash stock 1602, and end up with whatever ME firmware is embedded in that Bios, which according to ME Analyzer is 11.8.50.3470.
> 
> I am still missing something in my understanding of all of this so I guess its time for some more lurking at the other forum. HA! Anytime I start feeling like I know a lot about computers, all I have to do is head over there. Those guys are SCARY!
> 
> Anyway, I will keep reading and trying to understand, because time spent learning is never wasted.
> 
> Thanks!


You DON'T want to flash the 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR. It's dirty and not made for your BIOS or motherboard. You want to make the bios.bin from the 1101 or the 1602 BIOS and flash that firmware.


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> Main Board is Asus Maximus X Hero,
> Normal Hero without WiFi!
> In UBU Tool i have:
> 
> Choice 5 (for Microcode)
> than C for (Create FFS with MicroCodes)
> than U for Udate
> than 0 for comming in to Main Menu
> than 1 for Rename to M10H.CAP


Then after when you exit the menu 0 to Exit and 1 to rename file for USB Flashback.


----------



## KedarWolf

Link to WinRaid forums not working right on overclock.net. 

*All commands are without the single quotations.*



CRJ84 said:


> GJ nice results! Can you post a download link for that MEI version 11.8.50.3399?


Next, make a USB that's FAT32 with no boot files on it and put the EFI folder on it from this download.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1uK_x4WJFJwxjq0qdIV7ALSvN98GOHL5o

Boot from the USB in UEFI, type in the EFI shell *'setup_var 0x705 0x1' *without the quotations. Hit CTRL ALT DEL to reboot. You'll hear the BIOS reset as it reboots.

In Windows, download 'CSME Intel System Tools v11 r14+. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eiuS7sx-nl1uKP9jQvWMjrLIfX1dUXQx

Copy the WIN32 folder from the Flash Programming Tool folder to your D: drive. Put the bios.bin in it. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1lTJgKlPqLGb1zlVaR6T9xE1Mykteyyqn

The open an admin command prompt and go to the *D:\WIN32* folder and run this command once again without the quotation marks. *'fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin'*

Next without rebooting run *'fptw -greset'*. It'll reboot after you run the command.


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> Main Board is Asus Maximus X Hero,
> Normal Hero without WiFi!
> In UBU Tool i have:
> 
> Choice 5 (for Microcode)
> than C for (Create FFS with MicroCodes)
> than U for Udate
> than 0 for comming in to Main Menu
> than 1 for Rename to M10H.CAP



Here's 1003 with latest driver firmware and newest microcode. USB Flashback only.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1h69oOqTMsHTq7nmFAF0RDZqIai6Lr633


----------



## swddeluxx

KedarWolf said:


> Then after when you exit the menu 0 to Exit and 1 to rename file for USB Flashback.


I have already rename it with UBU Tool but it will not work 
i have testet it with your moded Bios too and it will no flash it with the same Message "The selected File is no proper BIOS File" 

There modded 1001 Bios from you:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...official-support-thread-217.html#post27519122

with this Bios i have flashed *another one *Maximus X Hero Board without problem but now it will NO flash my Board!
What a hell is that?, im confused and do not understand where my mistake?, can you help me *Kedar* ?


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> You DON'T want to flash the 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR. It's dirty and not made for your BIOS or motherboard. You want to make the bios.bin from the 1101 or the 1602 BIOS and flash that firmware.


Yeah well unfortunately that is what is in there now. I guess that is what I get for trying to keep things up to date and getting in over my head. I have not noticed any problems with the rig since I flashed that version but I guess I'd better get it out of there. I think I understand now why I have to get the ME firmware out of a preferred Asus Bios. Because Asus has added "custom stuff" to the PRD-RGN version to make the EXTR version specific to that board, and the EXTR version I downloaded is not constructed for the Asus Max X Hero WIFI. I think you made the same mistake earlier in this saga...

I will follow your method but I am wondering about a post from the other forum where an expert said:

If you want to flash ME all you do is follow the guides on how to flash ME, BIOS version or name or settings inside BIOS do not matter. 
Use the BIOS version with ME you want in it, and reflash ME using FPT and that BIOS, this does not matter what actual current (Latest) BIOS version is installed on the board
fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin << bios.bin, change to name of the BIOS you are using that already includes ME you want by default (ie not edited BIOS)

Example using BIOS 1101, while current already flashed BIOS is 9909 (Example BIOS, not actual, but version flashed in board already doesn't matter is my point)
fptw -rewrite -me -f ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO-WIFI-AC-ASUS-1101-ME-Reflash.bin

That will take the ME from that BIOS only, and rewrite over what ME is currently in the BIOS. It will not flash that BIOS version, only ME will be written.

This procedure does not mention booting to EFI Shell but it does refer to "guides on how to flash ME" so maybe that step is in the guides. It looks like the EFI Shell step is required to run the command setup_var 0x705 0x1, which I am guessing has to be done before fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin, fptw -greset. The setup_var 0x705 0x1 command temporarily disables the Intel ME Security Lock which is necessary before doing the fptw rewrite (I think). This makes sense but if true, how come I was able to flash 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR without running the EFI Shell setup_var command?

I probably won't have time to try it until the weekend. If I get stuck, I may ask you for some assistance.

Always learning I guess...


----------



## KedarWolf

swddeluxx said:


> I have already rename it with UBU Tool but it will not work
> 
> i have testet it with your moded Bios too and it will no flash it with the same Message "The selected File is no proper BIOS File"
> 
> There modded 1001 Bios from you:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...official-support-thread-217.html#post27519122
> 
> with this Bios i have flashed *another one *Maximus X Hero Board without problem but now it will NO flash my Board!
> What a hell is that?, im confused and do not understand where my mistake?, can you help me *Kedar* ?



Here's 1003 with latest driver firmware and newest microcode. USB Flashback only.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1h69oOqTMsHTq7nmFAF0RDZqIai6Lr633

You sure the USB is in the USB BIOS Flashback port and if you've used the USB for an UEFI drive you need to do the below.

https://www.itsupportguides.com/knowledge-base/tech-tips-tricks/how-to-format-disks-using-diskpart/

Or just use Rufus and make an MBR USB.

https://rufus.akeo.ie/


----------



## swddeluxx

You are THE MAN! Kedar!!! =)

the tricky was - my USB Stick was formated as FAT32 but Cluster Size was not Default, now im realy very happy with 1003 Bios. This is best Bios Version for memory Boot Training Process with fast Memory Speed (above 3800 MHz and more) and let doing 1T Rate to Memory without bad RTL and best IO Latency too!
Big Thanks Kedar, really nice from you Bro!


----------



## Jpmboy

swddeluxx said:


> *You are THE MAN! Kedar*!!! =)
> 
> the tricky was - my USB Stick was formated as FAT32 but Cluster Size was not Default, now im realy very happy with 1003 Bios. This is best Bios Version for memory Boot Training Process with fast Memory Speed (above 3800 MHz and more) and let doing 1T Rate to Memory without bad RTL and best IO Latency too!
> Big Thanks Kedar, really nice from you Bro!


that's for sure. where's that dam rep button!!!


----------



## CRJ84

KedarWolf said:


> Link to WinRaid forums not working right on overclock.net.
> 
> *All commands are without the single quotations.*
> 
> 
> 
> Next, make a USB that's FAT32 with no boot files on it and put the EFI folder on it from this download.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1uK_x4WJFJwxjq0qdIV7ALSvN98GOHL5o
> 
> Boot from the USB in UEFI, type in the EFI shell *'setup_var 0x705 0x1' *without the quotations. Hit CTRL ALT DEL to reboot. You'll hear the BIOS reset as it reboots.
> 
> In Windows, download 'CSME Intel System Tools v11 r14+. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eiuS7sx-nl1uKP9jQvWMjrLIfX1dUXQx
> 
> Copy the WIN32 folder from the Flash Programming Tool folder to your D: drive. Put the bios.bin in it. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1lTJgKlPqLGb1zlVaR6T9xE1Mykteyyqn
> 
> The open an admin command prompt and go to the *D:\WIN32* folder and run this command once again without the quotation marks. *'fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin'*
> 
> Next without rebooting run *'fptw -greset'*. It'll reboot after you run the command.


It worked!!! Thank you so much  Gonna test it right away.


----------



## Nilsagard

Hello!
Just tested with modded bios 1003 done through bios flashback, but with firmware 11.8.55.3510.
Insta-crash in OCCT small at 1.32v, 1.33v and 1.34v (@ 5.1/4.8 ghz). Reverted to Asus bios 1101 (from their website) and tested 1.32v with no problem (with 11.8.55.3510)...

@kedar: Have you tested (with your very appreciated scientific test  ) with ME 11.8.55.3510?

Why am I experiencing better OC capability with 1101 and firmware 11.8.55.3510? Is it some combination of CPU microcode and ME firmware, or can it be individually differences?

1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and older '84' microcode. 1.353v <- tested with 11.8.55.3510?

Edit: Succeded to downgrade ME firmware and testing "stock 1101" with firmware 11.8.50.3399. 1.32v is the lowest I can go here as well, so I guess in my case, ME firmware is not the issue as same bios (1101) with both 11.8.50.3399 and 11.8.55.3510 only require 1.32v for my OC settings. It might be something else in newer bioses that cause higher vcore?


----------



## SpeedyIV

Can I ask where you got 11.8.55.3510? The latest Asus Bios for Max X Hero WIFI contains 11.8.50.3470. The reason I ask is last week I downloaded 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR from Station Drivers and was able to flash it, only to be told later that "You DON'T want to flash the 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR. It's dirty and not made for your BIOS or motherboard. You want to make the bios.bin from the 1101 or the 1602 BIOS and flash that firmware." which is what I am preparing for now.

There is no Asus Bios (that I am aware of) for the Hero WIFI that comes packaged with 11.8.55.3510 so it's either an RGN version, which I read "Never flash RGN or 3rd-party EXTR firmware to the Engine firmware region of the system's SPI/BIOS chip without first configuring them for your specific system (EXTR) via FIT." and there is no EXTR version released by Asus (at least for my Hero WIFI), so any EXTR version you may have found does not contain the proper OEM code. 

I know Kedar flashed 11.8.55.3510 then went through a lot of grief to figure out the ME Firmware regression method he has posted above. Aside from his experience and mine, I am not aware of anyone who has flashed 11.8.55.3510 except Kedar and me, and now I am getting ready to try to regress to 11.8.50.3740 or 11.8.50.3399 (which seems to be the "best" per Kedar's testing), and then whatever version of Bios that I decide to go with. At the moment, Bios 1101 seems to be the best Bios. So where did you get 11.8.55.3510 and was it an RGN or an EXTR and if EXTR, where did it come from?


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Can I ask where you got 11.8.55.3510? The latest Asus Bios for Max X Hero WIFI contains 11.8.50.3470. The reason I ask is last week I downloaded 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR from Station Drivers and was able to flash it, only to be told later that "You DON'T want to flash the 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_EXTR. It's dirty and not made for your BIOS or motherboard. You want to make the bios.bin from the 1101 or the 1602 BIOS and flash that firmware." which is what I am preparing for now.
> 
> There is no Asus Bios (that I am aware of) for the Hero WIFI that comes packaged with 11.8.55.3510 so it's either an RGN version, which I read "Never flash RGN or 3rd-party EXTR firmware to the Engine firmware region of the system's SPI/BIOS chip without first configuring them for your specific system (EXTR) via FIT." and there is no EXTR version released by Asus (at least for my Hero WIFI), so any EXTR version you may have found does not contain the proper OEM code.
> 
> I know Kedar flashed 11.8.55.3510 then went through a lot of grief to figure out the ME Firmware regression method he has posted above. Aside from his experience and mine, I am not aware of anyone who has flashed 11.8.55.3510 except Kedar and me, and now I am getting ready to try to regress to 11.8.50.3740 or 11.8.50.3399 (which seems to be the "best" per Kedar's testing), and then whatever version of Bios that I decide to go with. At the moment, Bios 1101 seems to be the best Bios. So where did you get 11.8.55.3510 and was it an RGN or an EXTR and if EXTR, where did it come from?


It was on the Winraid forums and I flashed it before I found out it wasn't the way to do it.


----------



## MrYakuZa

Is there anybody with the same Sli issue on Asus Rog Strix Z370 F?
With both card, the white light of Mb is stay on vga.
With separate card there's no problem.

Enviado desde mi SM-G930F mediante Tapatalk


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> It was on the Winraid forums and I flashed it before I found out it wasn't the way to do it.


Hi Kedar,

I know where you got it. I was wondering where Nilsagard got it - thought maybe he found as Asus updated version of 11.8.55.3510.

I also noticed that every version of Bios I checked has the same Engine Security Version Number (SVN) (3), so I thought maybe a regression could be done with FWUpdLcl64.exe but the Engine Version Control Number (VCN) is different so I guess that would prohibit using FWUpdLcl64.exe. I have my USB drive formatted and ready to boot to EFI shell and run setup_var 0x705 0x1, then try to flash an older ME version. I'll post back when I try it.

Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

Nilsagard said:


> Hello!
> Just tested with modded bios 1003 done through bios flashback, but with firmware 11.8.55.3510.
> Insta-crash in OCCT small at 1.32v, 1.33v and 1.34v (@ 5.1/4.8 ghz). Reverted to Asus bios 1101 (from their website) and tested 1.32v with no problem (with 11.8.55.3510)...
> 
> @kedar: Have you tested (with your very appreciated scientific test  ) with ME 11.8.55.3510?
> 
> Why am I experiencing better OC capability with 1101 and firmware 11.8.55.3510? Is it some combination of CPU microcode and ME firmware, or can it be individually differences?
> 
> 1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and older '84' microcode. 1.353v <- tested with 11.8.55.3510?
> 
> Edit: Succeded to downgrade ME firmware and testing "stock 1101" with firmware 11.8.50.3399. 1.32v is the lowest I can go here as well, so I guess in my case, ME firmware is not the issue as same bios (1101) with both 11.8.50.3399 and 11.8.55.3510 only require 1.32v for my OC settings. It might be something else in newer bioses that cause higher vcore?


I don't have the correct version of 3510 to flash and you want the version that came with your motherboard BIOS as it has code in it related to the motherboard, not just a downloaded EXTR file.


----------



## kevindd992002

KedarWolf said:


> 1602 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.37v for 5.1GHZ CPU/ 4.9GHZ cache.
> 1602 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.355v.
> 1101 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.358v
> 1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.353v.
> 1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and older '84' microcode. 1.353v.
> 
> How I tested was with cache and memory settings on what I had tested last night as 200% HCI MemTest stable.
> 
> I ran RealBench 2.56 with 16GB of RAM, half of my 32GB for 15 minutes, if no BSOD, it passed.
> 
> Because the 96 microcode has the latest Spectre mitigation if you apply a Microsoft update patch manually which I already have, I'm now running 1101 on older '11.8.50.3399' MEI firmware with the 96 microcode.


Is this true for the ASUS Maximus X Code as well? So I take it that "1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode." is the best one to go, right? I'm still at the old 1101 BIOS with 11.8.50.3399 MEI now. I guess I just need to re-flash a BIOS with the latest 96 microcode then, yes?


----------



## KedarWolf

CRJ84 said:


> GJ nice results! Can you post a download link for that MEI version 11.8.50.3399?


*All commands are without the single quotations.*



CRJ84 said:


> GJ nice results! Can you post a download link for that MEI version 11.8.50.3399?


Next, make a USB that's FAT32 with no boot files on it and put the EFI folder on it from this download.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1uK_x4WJFJwxjq0qdIV7ALSvN98GOHL5o

Boot from the USB in UEFI, type in the EFI shell *'setup_var 0x705 0x1' *without the quotations. Hit enter, then CTRL ALT DEL to reboot. You'll hear the BIOS reset as it reboots. it'll take longer then usual.

In Windows, download 'CSME Intel System Tools v11 r14+. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eiuS7sx-nl1uKP9jQvWMjrLIfX1dUXQx

Copy the WIN32 folder from the Flash Programming Tool folder to your D: drive. Put the bios.bin in it. bios.bin found in this download https://drive.google.com/open?id=1lTJgKlPqLGb1zlVaR6T9xE1Mykteyyqn

The open an admin command prompt and go to the *D:\WIN32* folder and run this command once again without the quotation marks. *'fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin'*

Next without rebooting run *'fptw -greset'*. It'll reboot after you run the command.

*All commands don't include the quotations!*


----------



## KedarWolf

kevindd992002 said:


> Is this true for the ASUS Maximus X Code as well? So I take it that "1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode." is the best one to go, right? I'm still at the old 1101 BIOS with 11.8.50.3399 MEI now. I guess I just need to re-flash a BIOS with the latest 96 microcode then, yes?


Yes, you can update the RST driver firmware and Ethernet firmware as well. Had issues with the GOP firmware though. See my original post with links to the firmware.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27565128-post2426.html

Edit: Newest microcode has Spectre 2 protection but you need to download a patch from Microsoft as well for it. 1803 is the newest updated version of Windows. 

v2 for 1803
x86: http://download.windowsupdate.com/d..._c0dbd686177959c960618d7f76d741298e691259.msu
x64: http://download.windowsupdate.com/d..._501f58a8bdccf3609f6ca38f292df26ff564f15f.msu

v4 for 1709:
x86: http://download.windowsupdate.com/c..._ac957abd26d06b13737372b5045e0739d4c8ddf7.msu
x64: http://download.windowsupdate.com/d..._9d375293fe9c158a7a57a1d24967ee561cf0f150.msu

v4 for 1703:
x86: http://download.windowsupdate.com/c..._7226df3c60ce4ae57190b4cf62608392faf5fe63.msu
x64: http://download.windowsupdate.com/d..._1e3390cdb8b43d7bea78629b25482068bcd5ceb3.msu

v4 for 1607:
x86: http://download.windowsupdate.com/d..._ba097a4d46c910fca9ba11b6837bc21298204267.msu
x64: http://download.windowsupdate.com/d..._477d097ff20f4974e8a18cfdd637aae001d3d87a.msu

v3 for 1507:
x86: http://download.windowsupdate.com/c..._bb55d0a8817e4df6f69baaf74e12290d9a417445.msu
x64: http://download.windowsupdate.com/d..._0c2d5153641e6ea3e1891c356932f5a5988a4b56.msu[/QUOTE]


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> *All commands are without the single quotations.*
> 
> 
> 
> Next, make a USB that's FAT32 with no boot files on it and put the EFI folder on it from this download.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1uK_x4WJFJwxjq0qdIV7ALSvN98GOHL5o
> 
> Boot from the USB in UEFI, type in the EFI shell *'setup_var 0x705 0x1' *without the quotations. Hit enter, then CTRL ALT DEL to reboot. You'll hear the BIOS reset as it reboots. it'll take longer then usual.
> 
> In Windows, download 'CSME Intel System Tools v11 r14+. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eiuS7sx-nl1uKP9jQvWMjrLIfX1dUXQx
> 
> Copy the WIN32 folder from the Flash Programming Tool folder to your D: drive. Put the bios.bin in it. bios.bin found in this download https://drive.google.com/open?id=1lTJgKlPqLGb1zlVaR6T9xE1Mykteyyqn
> 
> The open an admin command prompt and go to the *D:\WIN32* folder and run this command once again without the quotation marks. *'fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin'*
> 
> Next without rebooting run *'fptw -greset'*. It'll reboot after you run the command.
> 
> *All commands don't include the quotations!*


This may be a stupid question, but do I have to go into the Bios and disable Secure Boot first? I am getting a Secure Boot Violation when I try to boot from the EFI USB stick. It says the system found unauthorized changes in the firmware, OS, or UEFI Drivers. If I have to disable Secure Boot, it looks like I have to backup then delete the Platform Keys to disable Secure Boot. I have never messed with these keys before and don't want to screw anything up (any more), Did you have to disable Secure Boot and if so, is there a way to do it that does not require deleting Secure Boot Keys?

Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> This may be a stupid question, but do I have to go into the Bios and disable Secure Boot first? I am getting a Secure Boot Violation when I try to boot from the EFI USB stick. It says the system found unauthorized changes in the firmware, OS, or UEFI Drivers. If I have to disable Secure Boot, it looks like I have to backup then delete the Platform Keys to disable Secure Boot. I have never messed with these keys before and don't want to screw anything up (any more), Did you have to disable Secure Boot and if so, is there a way to do it that does not require deleting Secure Boot Keys?
> 
> Thanks


No, you don't. Just disable Fast Boot and CSM and boot the USB as UEFI. 

Even if you don't disable them it's probably because you're not booting the USB as UEFI.

Edit: I found the issue. 'Secure Boot' needs to be on "Other OS'.

Change it to 'Other O/S', hit F10 save BIOS settings, reboot to the EFI shell, run the command, CTRL ALT DEL, DON'T go back into the BIOS right away, boot into Windows first, do the rest. Then you can change it back to UEFI after flashing the MEI.


----------



## SpeedyIV

*It worked!*

That is actually the first thing I did but I still got the warning. I went back into the Bios and confirmed that Secure Boot was set to Other OS and tried it again. This time it worked! I verified it with FWUpdLcl64.exe -fwver and with MEInfoWin64.exe. I have attached snips of the output. Thank you Kedar for sticking with me. So now I should be on 1602 with ME 11.8.50.3399 and ucode 0096. InSpectre and Ashampoo said not vulnerable but I don't know if they check for the latest variants. I tried to run the Microsoft patch you linked to but it said kb100347 was already installed so I think I am good there.

Next I will flash Bios 1101 but I guess I will need to load ucode 0096 in that. I think Bios 1101 has ucode 7C in it (if I am using UBU.bat right). I run the bat file from an elevated command prompt and sometimes it will complete the Bios scan and other times it will say "The process cannot access the files because it is being used by another process". Sometimes it will hang after this, sometime it will start again and do the OROM then hang. Other times it completes with no problem and I can continue to the modules. I have not figured out what causes it to say this.

Anyway, my ME firmware is regressed to 11.8.50.3399 and I am confident that I now have that process down, so if I decided to load 11.8.50.3470. I have learned a lot doing this!


----------



## Nilsagard

SpeedyIV said:


> Hi Kedar,
> 
> I know where you got it. I was wondering where Nilsagard got it - thought maybe he found as Asus updated version of 11.8.55.3510.
> 
> I also noticed that every version of Bios I checked has the same Engine Security Version Number (SVN) (3), so I thought maybe a regression could be done with FWUpdLcl64.exe but the Engine Version Control Number (VCN) is different so I guess that would prohibit using FWUpdLcl64.exe. I have my USB drive formatted and ready to boot to EFI shell and run setup_var 0x705 0x1, then try to flash an older ME version. I'll post back when I try it.
> 
> Thanks


Yes, got it from WinRaid forum. I have had no issue what so ever with it, but as it might not be suited for my mobo, I changed it back to an "Asus version" integrated in a stock bios.


----------



## bl4ckdot

*@ KedarWolf*


Should I revert to the Asus IME or stay with the 11.8.50.3474 you gave from win raid some week ago ?


----------



## KedarWolf

bl4ckdot said:


> *@ KedarWolf*
> 
> 
> Should I revert to the Asus IME or stay with the 11.8.50.3474 you gave from win raid some week ago ?


You want to go back to the Asus IME from the bios.bin.

Found out after the fact the WinRaid MEI firmware doesn't have all the code for our motherboards.


----------



## bl4ckdot

KedarWolf said:


> You want to go back to the Asus IME from the bios.bin.
> 
> Found out after the fact the WinRaid MEI firmware doesn't have all the code for our motherboards.



Alright thanks. 



https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...official-support-thread-248.html#post27568812
This is the method, right ? I'm on a Formula X, same thing I assume ? (most posts here are for the Hero, thats why I'm asking ^^)


----------



## KedarWolf

bl4ckdot said:


> Alright thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...official-support-thread-248.html#post27568812
> This is the method, right ? I'm on a Formula X, same thing I assume ? (most posts here are for the Hero, thats why I'm asking ^^)


Yes, I have a Formula, same for all Z370 Asus boards. 

Well, except you should make your own bios.bin from original post.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...s-official-support-thread-3.html#post27565128


----------



## KedarWolf

CRJ84 said:


> GJ nice results! Can you post a download link for that MEI version 11.8.50.3399?


Actually, better to make a bios.bin for the board you have from this post rather than use the downloaded one depending on your board.


https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...s-official-support-thread-3.html#post27565128


----------



## kevindd992002

@KedarWolf

How do you measure your stable voltages across the different BIOSes you test? Do you just read via software or BIOS monitors?


----------



## KedarWolf

kevindd992002 said:


> @KedarWolf
> 
> How do you measure your stable voltages across the different BIOSes you test? Do you just read via software or BIOS monitors?


I never measured the voltages when stress testing. The voltages were just what they were set in the BIOS with LLC5 so they'd be a bit lower in real time than what they were set at. :thumb:

Voltages are pretty much hardware dependent. I don't think they would vary between BIOS's if set at the same voltages.

Sounds like you are splitting hairs and making an issue of something that isn't really an issue. Those were the voltages that need to be set in the BIOS.

Edit: And with every BIOS I've checked in HWInfo the voltages were the same if they were set the same, even on different BIOS's.

Second edit: Sorry if I sound snippy, I'm at work, been a stressful day and I'm not feeling well on top of that.


----------



## kevindd992002

KedarWolf said:


> I never measured the voltages when stress testing. The voltages were just what they were set in the BIOS with LLC5 so they'd be a bit lower in real time than what they were set at. :thumb:


Right, but did you consider that the real voltage (measure by a voltmeter) might be more or less the same between different BIOSes? It's just that the latest BIOS makes it look like it's using more voltage when in reality it is really not?


----------



## bl4ckdot

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, I have a Formula, same for all Z370 Asus boards.
> 
> Well, except you should make your own bios.bin from original post.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...s-official-support-thread-3.html#post27565128



You are a boss. I'm now running 1602 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. Is it worth to go back to the 1101 BIOS and is it hard to do ? 



1602 it the one that supports the 9-series but I wonder if having an old MEI for this new generation will be a problem ...


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> Actually, better to make a bios.bin for the board you have from this post rather than use the downloaded one depending on your board.
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...s-official-support-thread-3.html#post27565128


I have been wondering about this. If I understand the following correctly, an RGN file is "virgin" as released by Intel to the OEM vendors and is referred to as "Unconfigured". The OEM vendors then add Mobo model specific code, which makes it an EXTR file, referred to as "Configured". Then, after deployment, and while running, the ME Engine co-processor can actually make some minor changes that is individual system specific This EXTR file is referred to as "Configured + Initialized". So the absolute BEST place to get a specific ME firmware 'bin file is from a Bios that has run concurrently with the ME firmware for some period of time, during which individual system specific changes are made.

The author (Plutomaniac from the Win-Raid forum) does not elaborate on what kinds of things the OEM vendors add, or what kinds of things are altered on an individual system basis by the ME co-processor, to make a "Configured + Initialized" version of the EXTR file, or how long it takes for these individual system specific adjustments to occur. I am guessing that there may be some type of initialization process that scans a bunch of parameters and perhaps adjusts some timings or tolerances? So any RGN file is not what you want, and an EXTR file really has to be from a Mobo that is the same exact model, or it has to be extracted from a Bios that actually ran on YOUR machine. Am I understanding this correctly?

"The Engine firmware Regions (RGN/EXTR) consist of two sections: CODE and DATA. CODE is the actual Engine firmware whereas DATA is where all the system-specific settings are stored, as configured by the OEM at the factory via Intel Flash Image Tool. The Engine firmware is not static as it holds system-specific configuration and can additionally be slightly configured by the Engine co-processor while the system is running in order to provide the proper support and functionality. Any such changes are written into the DATA section of the Engine Region and the firmware is considered initialized. That means that the DATA section can be in one of three states: Unconfigured, Configured or Configured + Initialized. Unconfigured means that the Engine firmware image is the stock one Intel provides and not configured at all (RGN). Configured means that the OEM has applied model specific settings and the Engine region is ready for deployment (EXTR). Configured + Initialized means that the Engine region comes from a system which was already running and thus the Engine co-processor might have further configured the DATA section to suit that particular system better (system specific or dirty EXTR)."


----------



## GeneO

bl4ckdot said:


> KedarWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I have a Formula, same for all Z370 Asus boards. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> Well, except you should make your own bios.bin from original post.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...s-official-support-thread-3.html#post27565128
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a boss. I'm now running 1602 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. Is it worth to go back to the 1101 BIOS and is it hard to do ?
> 
> 
> 
> 1602 it the one that supports the 9-series but I wonder if having an old MEI for this new generation will be a problem ...
Click to expand...

The IME has to recognize the CPU. The older IME will not so you will have to run the newer IME firmware for the 9k CPU.


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> I have been wondering about this. If I understand the following correctly, an RGN file is "virgin" as released by Intel to the OEM vendors and is referred to as "Unconfigured". The OEM vendors then add Mobo model specific code, which makes it an EXTR file, referred to as "Configured". Then, after deployment, and while running, the ME Engine co-processor can actually make some minor changes that is individual system specific This EXTR file is referred to as "Configured + Initialized". So the absolute BEST place to get a specific ME firmware 'bin file is from a Bios that has run concurrently with the ME firmware for some period of time, during which individual system specific changes are made.
> 
> The author (Plutomaniac from the Win-Raid forum) does not elaborate on what kinds of things the OEM vendors add, or what kinds of things are altered on an individual system basis by the ME co-processor, to make a "Configured + Initialized" version of the EXTR file, or how long it takes for these individual system specific adjustments to occur. I am guessing that there may be some type of initialization process that scans a bunch of parameters and perhaps adjusts some timings or tolerances? So any RGN file is not what you want, and an EXTR file really has to be from a Mobo that is the same exact model, or it has to be extracted from a Bios that actually ran on YOUR machine. Am I understanding this correctly?
> 
> "The Engine firmware Regions (RGN/EXTR) consist of two sections: CODE and DATA. CODE is the actual Engine firmware whereas DATA is where all the system-specific settings are stored, as configured by the OEM at the factory via Intel Flash Image Tool. The Engine firmware is not static as it holds system-specific configuration and can additionally be slightly configured by the Engine co-processor while the system is running in order to provide the proper support and functionality. Any such changes are written into the DATA section of the Engine Region and the firmware is considered initialized. That means that the DATA section can be in one of three states: Unconfigured, Configured or Configured + Initialized. Unconfigured means that the Engine firmware image is the stock one Intel provides and not configured at all (RGN). Configured means that the OEM has applied model specific settings and the Engine region is ready for deployment (EXTR). Configured + Initialized means that the Engine region comes from a system which was already running and thus the Engine co-processor might have further configured the DATA section to suit that particular system better (system specific or dirty EXTR)."


From what I understand you can make an EXTR file from an RGN through a long and laborious procedure I've tried but don't understand, and even if you do there are limitations which I assume to mean it might not have all the motherboard related info like flashing from a bios.bin would have as that MEI firmware is already configured for the motherboard. 

Which is why I recommend flashing from a bios.bin made from your board's BIOS. :h34r-smi


----------



## Scotty99

Ive scrolled back a few pages but still cant figure out why people are downgrading bios/ime versions lol?


----------



## KedarWolf

Scotty99 said:


> Ive scrolled back a few pages but still cant figure out why people are downgrading bios/ime versions lol?


People are getting stable overclocks with as much as .02v lower voltages on older MEI and BIOS's.

1602 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.37v for 5.1GHZ CPU/ 4.9GHZ cache.
1602 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.355v.
1101 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.358v
1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.353v.
1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and older '84' microcode. 1.353v.

How I tested was with cache and memory settings on what I had tested last night as 200% HCI MemTest stable.

I ran RealBench 2.56 with 16GB of RAM, half of my 32GB for 15 minutes, if no BSOD, it passed.

Because the 96 microcode has the latest Spectre mitigation if you apply a Microsoft update patch manually which I already have, I'm now running 1101 on older '11.8.50.3399' MEI firmware with the 96 microcode.

*Important edit: You need to decide for yourself if the older MEI even with the latest microcode is worth the slightly lower voltages. The newer MEI has security updates and while the security issues would not affect most mainstream users you need to decide for yourself if you want to take that risk.*


----------



## wingman99

KedarWolf said:


> People are getting stable overclocks with as much as .02v lower voltages on older MEI and BIOS's.


I wonder if the most recent MEI improves performance, then needing increased core voltage for stability?


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> From what I understand you can make an EXTR file from an RGN through a long and laborious procedure I've tried but don't understand, and even if you do there are limitations which I assume to mean it might not have all the motherboard related info like flashing from a bios.bin would have as that MEI firmware is already configured for the motherboard.
> 
> Which is why I recommend flashing from a bios.bin made from your board's BIOS. :h34r-smi


Yeah I read through that procedure. I had enough trouble figuring out UBUTool, MMTool, FWUpdLcl64, FPTW64, etc. I don't think I am ready for editing SMIP Signing Keys in a hex editor...


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> People are getting stable overclocks with as much as .02v lower voltages on older MEI and BIOS's.
> 
> 1602 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.37v for 5.1GHZ CPU/ 4.9GHZ cache.
> 1602 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.355v.
> 1101 with latest '11.8.50.3470' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.358v
> 1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and latest '96' microcode. 1.353v.
> 1101 with older '11.8.50.3399' MEI and older '84' microcode. 1.353v.
> 
> How I tested was with cache and memory settings on what I had tested last night as 200% HCI MemTest stable.
> 
> I ran RealBench 2.56 with 16GB of RAM, half of my 32GB for 15 minutes, if no BSOD, it passed.
> 
> Because the 96 microcode has the latest Spectre mitigation if you apply a Microsoft update patch manually which I already have, I'm now running 1101 on older '11.8.50.3399' MEI firmware with the 96 microcode.
> 
> *Important edit: You need to decide for yourself if the older MEI even with the latest microcode is worth the slightly lower voltages. The newer MEI has security updates and while the security issues would not affect most mainstream users you need to decide for yourself if you want to take that risk.*


Asus Max X Hero WIFI Bios 1602 comes with ME firmware 11.8.50.3470. There is no Asus Z370 Bios (that I am aware of) that has the latest ME firmware (11.8.55.3510). So the latest possible Asus configured ME firmware packaged in an Asus Bios, with whatever MOBO model specific data Asus puts in the ME firmware Data region is 11.8.50.3470. Is this correct?


----------



## KedarWolf

wingman99 said:


> I wonder if the most recent MEI improves performance, then needing increased core voltage for stability?


I found in the AIDA Cache And Memory Test benchmark were all pretty much identical between BIOS's.


----------



## wingman99

KedarWolf said:


> I found in the AIDA Cache And Memory Test benchmark were all pretty much identical between BIOS's.


Thanks. That should be a conclusive test for CPU performance.:thumb:


----------



## KedarWolf

wingman99 said:


> Thanks. That should be a conclusive test for CPU performance.:thumb:


I'm home from work in an hour or so. I'll run the AIDA64 on 1101 with the latest microcode and old MEI a few times, then flash 1602 and run it again a few times. After three runs on each, we'll see if there is any difference within a limited margin of error. Happy Friday. :cheers:


----------



## wingman99

KedarWolf said:


> I'm home from work in an hour or so. I'll run the AIDA64 on 1101 with the latest microcode and old MEI a few times, then flash 1602 and run it again a few times. After three runs on each, we'll see if there is any difference within a limited margin of error. Happy Friday. :cheers:


Thanks, that will be good. Do you have any other benchmarks you could run also?


----------



## KedarWolf

wingman99 said:


> Thanks, that will be good. Do you have any other benchmarks you could run also?


Yes, I'll run Cinebench, SuperPi 1M, and the 3DMark DirectX 12 Time Spy for GPU.


----------



## GeneO

Scotty99 said:


> Ive scrolled back a few pages but still cant figure out why people are downgrading bios/ime versions lol?



Stable overclock at lower voltage.


----------



## Jpmboy

GeneO said:


> Stable overclock at lower voltage.



not quite accurate... no voltage measurements have been made, only bios and or CPUZ-like and the differences are 10mV or so. Remember guys, ANY OS-based voltage read out is in 16mV increments due to how the data is reported to the OS from the CPU and SIO.


----------



## KedarWolf

*Various Benchmarks, 1602 with 3399 MEI, 1101 with 3399 MEI, 1602 With 3470 MEI*

*Updated, MSI Afterburner turned off after booting Windows.*

*1602 With 3399 MEI Firmware*



Spoiler


















































































































*1101, 3399 MEI Firmware.*



Spoiler


















































































































*1602 3470 MEI Firmware*



Spoiler


----------



## wingman99

KedarWolf said:


> *1602 With 3399 MEI Firmware*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *1101, 3399 MEI Firmware.*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *1602 3470 MEI Firmware*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Thanks for doing the testing, you are the man.:specool:


----------



## KedarWolf

wingman99 said:


> Thanks for doing the testing, you are the man.:specool:


I'm going to update it soon, big difference if I close MSI Afterburner after the PC boots, better benchmarks, like because the MSI hardware monitor isn't running, finishing the retesting on the last BIOS, 1602 with MEI 3470.


----------



## GeneO

Jpmboy said:


> not quite accurate... no voltage measurements have been made, only bios and or CPUZ-like and the differences are 10mV or so. Remember guys, ANY OS-based voltage read out is in 16mV increments due to how the data is reported to the OS from the CPU and SIO.



This is true. I assumed the voltage is measured and reported the same way for different IME firmware. Since the IME may be involved in reporting vcore this may not be the case. I do get soft WHEA errors with the newer firmware more frequently and even increasing the voltage a notch or two I could not get a stable overclock on the newer IME firmware. 


OK this is driving me nuts peeps. (I)MEI = (Intel) Management Engine Interface. It is the OS driver. The firmware is not (I)MEI it is (I)ME = (Intel) Management Engine.


----------



## ViTosS

Guys, I'm using the latest BIOS available for my mobo in the official site, I see a lot of you speaking about IMEI/IME and the ones listed in the official site are from 2017, where can I update my IMEI/IME? Also do you guys recommend doing it? I'm using the latest one from the official Asus site, which is 11.7.0.1045 and the chipset driver is 10.1.1.45.

Thanks.


----------



## KedarWolf

ViTosS said:


> Guys, I'm using the latest BIOS available for my mobo in the official site, I see a lot of you speaking about IMEI/IME and the ones listed in the official site are from 2017, where can I update my IMEI/IME? Also do you guys recommend doing it? I'm using the latest one from the official Asus site, which is 11.7.0.1045 and the chipset driver is 10.1.1.45.
> 
> Thanks.


If you want the latest MEI firmware run EZ Flash bios updater from within the BIOS with BIOS 1602 and it'll update the MEI to the latest version. NOT USB Flashback, EZ Flash in the BIOS itself.


----------



## feznz

GeneO said:


> This is true. I assumed the voltage is measured and reported the same way for different IME firmware. Since the IME may be involved in reporting vcore this may not be the case. I do get soft WHEA errors with the newer firmware more frequently and even increasing the voltage a notch or two I could not get a stable overclock on the newer IME firmware.
> 
> 
> OK this is driving me nuts peeps. (I)MEI = (Intel) Management Engine Interface. It is the OS driver. The firmware is not (I)MEI it is (I)ME = (Intel) Management Engine.



Still looks like the 1101, with 3399 is the best proformance thanks to KedarWolf comfirmation 


the IME vs MEI confused me too I thought missed something, it is what it is...


Thanks to your advice GeneO I guess none of this applies to me as I am already on the best proforming IME and bios 


But as I said before I just don't know what the difference in IME versions when I pass specture and meltdown test checks


----------



## KedarWolf

feznz said:


> Still looks like the 1101, with 3399 is the best proformance thanks to KedarWolf comfirmation
> 
> 
> the IME vs MEI confused me too I thought missed something, it is what it is...
> 
> 
> Thanks to your advice GeneO I guess none of this applies to me as I am already on the best proforming IME and bios
> 
> 
> But as I said before I just don't know what the difference in IME versions when I pass specture and meltdown test checks


Actually, I never realized I was on the 84 microcode for the 1101 test. Getting some better results with the 96 microcode.

I lost the screens from reinstalling Windows but Time Spy was 10668 and 10657, the SuperPi 1M with 7.155 twice and the Cinebench 1716 and 1707 so somewhat better on the 96 microcode.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Do you know what could trigger the AVX offset pretty much everytime ? I'm like 98% of the time at 4.8 instead of 5GHz even right after the boot.


----------



## ziddey

bl4ckdot said:


> Do you know what could trigger the AVX offset pretty much everytime ? I'm like 98% of the time at 4.8 instead of 5GHz even right after the boot.


Chrome


----------



## bl4ckdot

ziddey said:


> Chrome


Not using it. It's also in AVX mode without any app launched


----------



## wingman99

bl4ckdot said:


> Do you know what could trigger the AVX offset pretty much everytime ? I'm like 98% of the time at 4.8 instead of 5GHz even right after the boot.


The OS background processes also use AVX.


----------



## feznz

KedarWolf said:


> Actually, I never realized I was on the 84 microcode for the 1101 test. Getting some better results with the 96 microcode.
> 
> I lost the screens from reinstalling Windows but Time Spy was 10668 and 10657, the SuperPi 1M with 7.155 twice and the Cinebench 1716 and 1707 so somewhat better on the 96 microcode.



LOL where have I been I just looked at the release notes for 1602 "supports next gen processor" so I take that means 9000 series 


TBH I still have that it aint broke don't fix it for the slightly better bench results 
Can't be bothered redoing the OC just might wait till 1701 and let you guys give me the thumbs up or down


----------



## bl4ckdot

wingman99 said:


> The OS background processes also use AVX.


So, is it normal then ? What do you guys are getting ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Question, if I have a 4X PCI-e lane capture card in the 4X PCI-e slot, a 1x sound card in the 1x PCI-e slot, and two graphics cards in the PCI-e 16x slots would the cards be 8x/8x or 8x/4x?

What I mean do the 1x and 4x PCI-e slots run off the CPU lanes? Plus I have two 4x 960 Pros on the DMI lanes. 

Now I'm wondering if I should of went X299 for this setup instead of an 8700k


----------



## feznz

bl4ckdot said:


> So, is it normal then ? What do you guys are getting ?



it normal best to set you best OC with no AVX then when you have it stable add your AVX


IE want 5Ghz set it with no AVZ then when you got it 100% stable set clock to 5.2Ghz then add -2AVX that way you will get a bonus .2Ghz without touching voltage 
TBH it is more of a sales gimic as honstly the difference between 5.0Ghz and 5.2Ghz is only distinguishable in benchmarks


----------



## bl4ckdot

KedarWolf said:


> Question, if I have a 4X PCI-e lane capture card in the 4X PCI-e slot, a 1x sound card in the 1x PCI-e slot, and two graphics cards in the PCI-e 16x slots would the cards be 8x/8x or 8x/4x?
> 
> What I mean do the 1x and 4x PCI-e slots run off the CPU lanes? Plus I have two 4x 960 Pros on the DMI lanes.
> 
> Now I'm wondering if I should of went X299 for this setup instead of an 8700k



The GPUs will be 8/8. They are directly connected to the CPU and don't go through the PCH.


----------



## feznz

KedarWolf said:


> Question, if I have a 4X PCI-e lane capture card in the 4X PCI-e slot, a 1x sound card in the 1x PCI-e slot, and two graphics cards in the PCI-e 16x slots would the cards be 8x/8x or 8x/4x?
> 
> What I mean do the 1x and 4x PCI-e slots run off the CPU lanes? Plus I have two 4x 960 Pros on the DMI lanes.
> 
> Now I'm wondering if I should of went X299 for this setup instead of an 8700k



look in your Bios should be listed I have 2 GPUs both @ x8x8 and sound card must be running off the DMI lanes somehow 
I was wondering something similar as I use a second GPU for accessory display only and the first GPU looks lonely by itself so I gave him a buddy to play with 
was I better to just have 1 card running x16? but the PC looks empty so I kept the 2 GPUS for aesthetics


----------



## KedarWolf

bl4ckdot said:


> The GPUs will be 8/8. They are directly connected to the CPU and don't go through the PCH.


Can I run a 4x capture card in the third long PCI-E slot though with a 1x sound card in the 1x and two PCI-e SSDs on the M.2 slots?


----------



## bl4ckdot

KedarWolf said:


> Can I run a 4x capture card in the third long PCI-E slot though with a 1x sound card in the 1x and two PCI-e SSDs on the M.2 slots?



In theory yes. Now I don't know how much bandwith the capture card actually need and how your SSDs are being used.


----------



## ArneR

I have a question someone here might know the answer to: 

I currently have a set of 2x8GB Trident Z 3200MHz cl14 dimms and want to expand with two more. Would buying Trident Z 3600MHz cl 16 potensially mess up something? Or would they run fine together? Currently running the 3200 kit at 3600 cl16 anyway. Not tried any higher frequency or lower timings yet. Not using XMP.

Max hero x, 8700k.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

ArneR said:


> I have a question someone here might know the answer to:
> 
> I currently have a set of 2x8GB Trident Z 3200MHz cl14 dimms and want to expand with two more. Would buying Trident Z 3600MHz cl 16 potensially mess up something? Or would they run fine together? Currently running the 3200 kit at 3600 cl16 anyway. Not tried any higher frequency or lower timings yet. Not using XMP.
> 
> Max hero x, 8700k.


I think you'll be fine, just have to tune it manually.


----------



## ArneR

So not confusing the bios in regards to memory training then you think?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

ArneR said:


> So not confusing the bios in regards to memory training then you think?



3600Mhz CL16 should be Samsung B-die chips like your current 3200MHz kit. Think you'll be ok. Can you get the 3600Mhz CL15 kit or is color the issue?


----------



## aerotracks

Some memory results on Apex with Corsair LPX, 8086k on boxed cooler using IGP


----------



## wingman99

bl4ckdot said:


> So, is it normal then ? What do you guys are getting ?


AVX running sporadically is normal. The programs that I use that have AVX don't heat the processor much, so I don't use AVX offset.


----------



## bl4ckdot

wingman99 said:


> AVX running sporadically is normal. The programs that I use that have AVX don't heat the processor much, so I don't use AVX offset.



I see, thank you !


----------



## ArneR

MrTOOSHORT said:


> 3600Mhz CL16 should be Samsung B-die chips like your current 3200MHz kit. Think you'll be ok. Can you get the 3600Mhz CL15 kit or is color the issue?


That's what I'm thinking too. 
The cl15 kit is tempting, but it is really expensive and might not look too good in between the other kit which is rgb.


----------



## Jpmboy

bl4ckdot said:


> So, is it normal then ? What do you guys are getting ?


windows 10 with speed shift enabled will run at the AVX offset during os-handoff and driver/service loading. It shold then idle down to the ... idle state. My 8700K, 8086K, 8350.. etc behave the same way (7980xe does not seem to tho :thinking: )


----------



## Jpmboy

aerotracks said:


> Some memory results on Apex with Corsair LPX, 8086k on boxed cooler using IGP


So,... what's the verdict on the sticks?

I didn't notice any more difficulty when on the iGP, but def noticed an effect of v high cache freq on 4500 - the Imc on this 8086k does not like it, but my (v early) 8700K ES has no problem at all (up to 52)
same result with 3600c15 or 4400c19 kits - basically can swap one for the other :blinksmil


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> So,... what's the verdict on the sticks?
> 
> I didn't notice any more difficulty when on the iGP, but def noticed an effect of v high cache freq on 4500 - the Imc on this 8086k does not like it, but my (v early) 8700K ES has no problem at all (up to 52)
> same result with 3600c15 or 4400c19 kits - basically can swap one for the other :blinksmil


When I enable the iGPU as a second screen with a monitor attached with my 1080 Ti I get an instant BSOD when I run RealBench that I don't get with the same overclock settings on just the 1080 Ti with the iGPU disabled.


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> When I enable the iGPU as a second screen with a monitor attached with my 1080 Ti I get an instant BSOD when I run RealBench that I don't get with the same overclock settings on just the 1080 Ti with the iGPU disabled.



Most likely Open CL is crashing in luxmark. Have you tried removing the 1080ti and see if the iGPU can pass realbench itself?


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> Most likely Open CL is crashing in luxmark. Have you tried removing the 1080ti and see if the iGPU can pass realbench itself?


No point. I wanted to run my second 1080p screen on the iGPU and my main 4K G-Sync screen on the 1080 Ti but because of the instability, I need to run both on the 1080 Ti.


----------



## Jpmboy

ah - I haven't tried a mixed resolution multimonitor off the iGPU, on same rez. But my post above really only referred to running the igpu solo and not seeing a limit on the ram frequency.


----------



## kevindd992002

KedarWolf said:


> It was on the Winraid forums and I flashed it before I found out it wasn't the way to do it.


How do I update my ME with 11.8.55.3510 from the WinRaid forum? I updated my ME engine firmware a couple of times back when I was still using a Z68 board and all I used were the downloaded files from the WinRaid forum. Is it different now? Do you need to extract the ME that is in the BIOS from ASUS and re-image the BIOS to include an updated ME firmware tailored to your specific board? I don't understand and the Intel ME Firmware thread in WinRAID doesn't really tell me anything about these questions.

Please help. Thanks.


----------



## SpeedyIV

kevindd992002 said:


> How do I update my ME with 11.8.55.3510 from the WinRaid forum? I updated my ME engine firmware a couple of times back when I was still using a Z68 board and all I used were the downloaded files from the WinRaid forum. Is it different now? Do you need to extract the ME that is in the BIOS from ASUS and re-image the BIOS to include an updated ME firmware tailored to your specific board? I don't understand and the Intel ME Firmware thread in WinRAID doesn't really tell me anything about these questions.
> 
> Please help. Thanks.


I am no expert on this but after a crash course, I think what you said is correct. It is my understanding that you HAVE to get the Data Region of the IME firmware for your specific MOBO from the MOBO manufacturer, and go through the process at this link to get this manufacturer & model specific block of code into the IME firmware. Since this code can be modified slightly by the Engine Co-Processor, it is best to actually extract the code from a machine that is running a version of the BIOS that has the IME firmware version (in your case 11.8.55.3510) already in it. AFAIK, 11.8.55.3510 IS the latest version. The problem is (at least for my MOBO), the latest Asus BIOS release (1602) does not contain 11.8.55.3510. Max X Hero Wifi Bios 1602 has MEI Firmware version 11.8.50.3470 in it (according to ME Analyzer v1.56.2). So there is no Asus Bios that has the proper Data Region code for IME firmware version 11.8.55.3510.

The versions of IME firmware 11.8.55.3510 that are on Win-Raid or Station Drivers are limited to an RGN version, which is stock from Intel (Unconfigured), or an EXTR version, which has been Configured with some MOBO specific Data Region code, but not code written for as Asus MOBO (Configured + Initialized). So I think until Asus gets around to rolling out a BIOS with IME Firmware version 11.8.55.3510 in it, there is no way you can do this. I could be wrong and defer to those with a greater understanding than mine.

https://www.win-raid.com/t1658f39-G...egions-with-Data-Initialization.html#msg24423

From this link:

"The Engine firmware Regions (RGN/EXTR) consist of two sections: CODE and DATA. CODE is the actual Engine firmware whereas DATA is where all the system-specific settings are stored, as configured by the OEM at the factory via Intel Flash Image Tool. The Engine firmware is not static as it holds system-specific configuration and can additionally be slightly configured by the Engine co-processor while the system is running in order to provide the proper support and functionality. Any such changes are written into the DATA section of the Engine Region and the firmware is considered initialized. That means that the DATA section can be in one of three states: Unconfigured, Configured or Configured + Initialized. Unconfigured means that the Engine firmware image is the stock one Intel provides and not configured at all (RGN). Configured means that the OEM has applied model specific settings and the Engine region is ready for deployment (EXTR). Configured + Initialized means that the Engine region comes from a system which was already running and thus the Engine co-processor might have further configured the DATA section to suit that particular system better (system specific or dirty EXTR)."

"A dumped SPI/BIOS image comes from a system which was already operating so the contained Engine Region should have a Configured + Initialized DATA section. In order for that dump to be usable on another system of the same OEM model we need to clean the "Initialization" extra data and thus end up with an Engine Region which has a Configured-only DATA section. This is important because on some cases these small dumped "initialization" changes made by the Engine co-processor of a system can lead to a malfunctioning or a corrupted Engine Region when transferred to another system even one of the same OEM model."


----------



## kevindd992002

SpeedyIV said:


> I am no expert on this but after a crash course, I think what you said is correct. It is my understanding that you HAVE to get the Data Region of the IME firmware for your specific MOBO from the MOBO manufacturer, and go through the process at this link to get this manufacturer & model specific block of code into the IME firmware. Since this code can be modified slightly by the Engine Co-Processor, it is best to actually extract the code from a machine that is running a version of the BIOS that has the IME firmware version (in your case 11.8.55.3510) already in it. AFAIK, 11.8.55.3510 IS the latest version. The problem is (at least for my MOBO), the latest Asus BIOS release (1602) does not contain 11.8.55.3510. Max X Hero Wifi Bios 1602 has MEI Firmware version 11.8.50.3470 in it (according to ME Analyzer v1.56.2). So there is no Asus Bios that has the proper Data Region code for IME firmware version 11.8.55.3510.
> 
> The versions of IME firmware 11.8.55.3510 that are on Win-Raid or Station Drivers are limited to an RGN version, which is stock from Intel (Unconfigured), or an EXTR version, which has been Configured with some MOBO specific Data Region code, but not code written for as Asus MOBO (Configured + Initialized). So I think until Asus gets around to rolling out a BIOS with IME Firmware version 11.8.55.3510 in it, there is no way you can do this. I could be wrong and defer to those with a greater understanding than mine.
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/t1658f39-G...egions-with-Data-Initialization.html#msg24423
> 
> From this link:
> 
> "The Engine firmware Regions (RGN/EXTR) consist of two sections: CODE and DATA. CODE is the actual Engine firmware whereas DATA is where all the system-specific settings are stored, as configured by the OEM at the factory via Intel Flash Image Tool. The Engine firmware is not static as it holds system-specific configuration and can additionally be slightly configured by the Engine co-processor while the system is running in order to provide the proper support and functionality. Any such changes are written into the DATA section of the Engine Region and the firmware is considered initialized. That means that the DATA section can be in one of three states: Unconfigured, Configured or Configured + Initialized. Unconfigured means that the Engine firmware image is the stock one Intel provides and not configured at all (RGN). Configured means that the OEM has applied model specific settings and the Engine region is ready for deployment (EXTR). Configured + Initialized means that the Engine region comes from a system which was already running and thus the Engine co-processor might have further configured the DATA section to suit that particular system better (system specific or dirty EXTR)."
> 
> "A dumped SPI/BIOS image comes from a system which was already operating so the contained Engine Region should have a Configured + Initialized DATA section. In order for that dump to be usable on another system of the same OEM model we need to clean the "Initialization" extra data and thus end up with an Engine Region which has a Configured-only DATA section. This is important because on some cases these small dumped "initialization" changes made by the Engine co-processor of a system can lead to a malfunctioning or a corrupted Engine Region when transferred to another system even one of the same OEM model."


Yeah, I gotcha. I asked plutomaniac about this and hopefully he can confirm once and for all. It's a very confusing topic even though I read the discussions multiple times already.


----------



## feznz

here we go again meltdown spectre now the next security exploit foreshadow :h34r-smi:

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/intel-sa-00161.html


----------



## AudioSky

Hi guys! i trying downgrade bios on asus z370-f 1002->0605 using Kedar metod. I type in the EFI shell setup_var 0x705 0x1 and see this:

grub> setup_var 0x705 0x1
Looking for Setup variable...
var name: Setup, var size: 12, var guid: ec87d643-eba4-4bb5 -
a1-e5-3f-3e-36-b2-od-a9

--> GUID does not match expected GUID, taking it nevertheless...
expected a different size of the Setup variable (got 4263 (0x10a7) bytes).
Continue with care...
successfully obtained "Setup" variable from VSS (got 4263 (0x10a7) bytes).
offset 0x705 is: 0x00
Setting offset 0x705 to 0x01

So, is it normal? Or i make something else to beginning next steps?


----------



## KedarWolf

AudioSky said:


> Hi guys! i trying downgrade bios on asus z370-f 1002->0605 using Kedar metod. I type in the EFI shell setup_var 0x705 0x1 and see this:
> 
> grub> setup_var 0x705 0x1
> Looking for Setup variable...
> var name: Setup, var size: 12, var guid: ec87d643-eba4-4bb5 -
> a1-e5-3f-3e-36-b2-od-a9
> 
> --> GUID does not match expected GUID, taking it nevertheless...
> expected a different size of the Setup variable (got 4263 (0x10a7) bytes).
> Continue with care...
> successfully obtained "Setup" variable from VSS (got 4263 (0x10a7) bytes).
> offset 0x705 is: 0x00
> Setting offset 0x705 to 0x01
> 
> So, is it normal? Or i make something else to beginning next steps?


Yes, that's normal. Ctrl Alt Del right after you do that command, it'll take longer for your PC to reboot. Then do the rest with the bios.bin you made.


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, that's normal. Ctrl Alt Del right after you do that command, it'll take longer for your PC to reboot. Then do the rest with the bios.bin you made.


Yeah I got the same thing. Scary, but it worked. After you hit Cntrl Alt Delete remember to pull the USB stick out and switch the BIOS boot order back to normal. The flash write enable seems to only stay enabled for one boot. I left the USB stick in and it booted to EFI again. I didn't run the setup_var command again. Just exited out. The Flash Enable did not stay enabled so when I tried to flash it wouldn't work. I had to boot to EFI again, run setup_var again and remember to pull the USB stick out so it would not boot to EFI again. After that it worked. Good luck!!


----------



## AudioSky

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, that's normal. Ctrl Alt Del right after you do that command, it'll take longer for your PC to reboot. Then do the rest with the bios.bin you made.


Sorry Kedar, i need to ask another stupid question. Befor typing fptw -rewrite -me -f bios1.cap on console i see error message:

Error 451: The host CPU does not have write access to the target flash area. 
To enable write access for this operation you must modify the descriptor settings to give host access to this region.
FPT Operation Failed.

This means wrong IME version? or i create wrong bios. I tried again and again, but nothing happens. Don't understand. :sadsmiley


----------



## KedarWolf

AudioSky said:


> Sorry Kedar, i need to ask another stupid question. Befor typing fptw -rewrite -me -f bios1.cap on console i see error message:
> 
> Error 451: The host CPU does not have write access to the target flash area.
> To enable write access for this operation you must modify the descriptor settings to give host access to this region.
> FPT Operation Failed.


Need to make a bios.bin and right after you do the EFI command Ctrl Alt Del and boot right into Windows.

*Note, all the commands etc. remove the quotation marks.*

Download the latest UBU Tool and modded MMTool here. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1s2KNNSaNhzc3OY-7W6fB0PcjmIRGHJMc

Put the unzipped Patched MMTool in your extracted UBUTools folder. Put the BIOS you want the MEI from in the UBU Tools folder and right click on ubu.bat and *'Run As Admin'*

It'll find the BIOS and you can update the microcode from here. the microcode is in the Files/Intel/mCode folder in the UBU Tools folder. You get the latest RAID and SATA firmware from here and put in the Files/Intel/RST folder. You can update the Ethernet firmware but I'd pass on the GOP firmware, had issues with it. 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1A_F78ZwWX9QcdVjentkiXX51chnJaDwi

https://drive.google.com/open?id=16phhXciU_Wp0R-qkOy-xbeKcNdBb-D6H

Then you exit out of UBU Tool pressing 0 and 0 to make a *'bios.bin'*

Next, make a USB that's FAT32 with no boot files on it and put the EFI folder on it from this download. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1uK_x4WJFJwxjq0qdIV7ALSvN98GOHL5o

Boot from the USB in UEFI, type in the EFI shell *'setup_var 0x705 0x1'* without the quotations. Hit Enter, then CTRL ALT DEL to reboot. You'll hear the BIOS reset as it reboots. It'll take longer to reboot.

In Windows, download 'CSME Intel System Tools v11 r14+. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1LjtSGxOewFz0x4ZDrVWxxGoSmhPqcjfj

Copy the WIN32 folder from the Flash Programming Tool folder to your D: drive. Put the bios.bin you made in it.

The open an admin command prompt and go to the D:\WIN32 folder and run this command once again without the quotation marks. *'fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin'*

Next without rebooting run *'fptw -greset'*. It'll reboot after you run the command.

After it reboots you can check your MEI firmware is downgraded by copying the WIN64 folder from the FWUpdate folder in the CSME tools folder to your D: drive, admin command prompt to *D:\WIN64* and run *'FWUpdLcl64.exe -fwver'* If for any reason you get an error message that it's not found or anything try running *'fptw -greset'* again from the *D:\WIN32* folder.

*Oh, and I forgot to add to change the bios.bin back to the M10H.CAP or the .CAP file type for your motherboard run ubu.bat as admin again, choose 0, then 1 to rename it to the BIOS Flashback .CAP file for your board, done!!

Then flash the BIOS you flashed the MEI from and you're fully back on that BIOS.*


----------



## Jpmboy

I hope you keep all that om a note pad ready for copy-paste.


----------



## swddeluxx

I have found a one Bios File from my Asus Maximus X Hero Motherboard installation CD, there is it:


https://www.file-upload.net/download-13284289/M10H.CAP.html


can anyone test it what a Bios Version is that?


----------



## ziddey

swddeluxx said:


> I have found a one Bios File from my Asus Maximus X Hero Motherboard installation CD, there is it:
> 
> 
> https://www.file-upload.net/download-13284289/M10H.CAP.html
> 
> 
> can anyone test it what a Bios Version is that?


0213


----------



## swddeluxx

ziddey said:


> 0213


Thanks ziddey :thumb:


but how did you manage to read this file?, because if i will read this File under EZ Bios Flash,
i have *"This File is not a proper Bios" *Message. Hmmm :thinking:


----------



## AudioSky

Ok, step by step

1) download all programs and unzipped

2) Put the ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING-ASUS-0605.CAP on UBU tools folder. 

3) ubu.bat Run As Admin, program detect bios, press 5-CPU MicroCode, press M-User Select only 1 Microcode File, choice: cpu906EA_plat22_ver00000096_2018-05-02_PRD_730E6662.bin, press M-Used MMTool, replaced completed, 0-Exit to Main Menu, 1-Disk Controller, 1-Update, operation completed, 0 - Exit, 0-As Is BIOS.BIN, copy bios.bin to D:\win32

4) reboot PC, go to bios, boot from the USB in UEFI, setup_var 0x705 0x1, ctrl+alt+del, boot windows

5) run cmd as admin, go to the D:\win32 folder, type fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin, see error message.

906EA this is 8700k right? Tell me what I'm doing wrong?!


----------



## ziddey

swddeluxx said:


> Thanks ziddey :thumb:
> 
> 
> but how did you manage to read this file?, because if i will read this File under EZ Bios Flash,
> i have *"This File is not a proper Bios" *Message. Hmmm :thinking:


https://github.com/LongSoft/FD44Editor


----------



## swddeluxx

ziddey said:


> https://github.com/LongSoft/FD44Editor



Thanks *ziddey* :thumb:


----------



## SpeedyIV

AudioSky said:


> Ok, step by step
> 
> 1) download all programs and unzipped
> 
> 2) Put the ROG-STRIX-Z370-F-GAMING-ASUS-0605.CAP on UBU tools folder.
> 
> 3) ubu.bat Run As Admin, program detect bios, press 5-CPU MicroCode, press M-User Select only 1 Microcode File, choice: cpu906EA_plat22_ver00000096_2018-05-02_PRD_730E6662.bin, press M-Used MMTool, replaced completed, 0-Exit to Main Menu, 1-Disk Controller, 1-Update, operation completed, 0 - Exit, 0-As Is BIOS.BIN, copy bios.bin to D:\win32
> 
> 4) reboot PC, go to bios, boot from the USB in UEFI, setup_var 0x705 0x1, ctrl+alt+del, boot windows
> 
> 5) run cmd as admin, go to the D:\win32 folder, type fptw -rewrite -me -f bios.bin, see error message.
> 
> 906EA this is 8700k right? Tell me what I'm doing wrong?!


Hmmm. Sounds right. Did you try...

"If for any reason you get an error message that it's not found or anything try running 'fptw -greset' again from the D:\WIN32 folder."

IIRC, I did do that after the flash. Sorry I don't remember if there was an error message after the flash.


----------



## KedarWolf

SpeedyIV said:


> Hmmm. Sounds right. Did you try...
> 
> "If for any reason you get an error message that it's not found or anything try running 'fptw -greset' again from the D:\WIN32 folder."
> 
> IIRC, I did do that after the flash. Sorry I don't remember if there was an error message after the flash.


Check your IME version now. In BIOS or by following the guide.


----------



## ViTosS

KedarWolf said:


> If you want the latest MEI firmware run EZ Flash bios updater from within the BIOS with BIOS 1602 and it'll update the MEI to the latest version. NOT USB Flashback, EZ Flash in the BIOS itself.


Sorry for the late response, I did that, so I pointed to search via internet latest BIOS and it said my BIOS is already up to date, my IME/IMEI is the same as before


----------



## kevindd992002

FYI, anyone can upgrade to the latest ME firmware of our Z370 boards by flashing the latest Consumer 11.8 RGN bin file using FWUpdate. So it's the same process when I did this for my old Z68 board in the past.
@KedarWolf can confirm this as well. He already tried.


----------



## KedarWolf

kevindd992002 said:


> FYI, anyone can upgrade to the latest ME firmware of our Z370 boards by flashing the latest Consumer 11.8 RGN bin file using FWUpdate. So it's the same process when I did this for my old Z68 board in the past.
> @KedarWolf can confirm this as well. He already tried.


Still need to find out if you need to do the Engine CleanUp Guide stuff on the firmware before flashing it. I asked in WinRaid, waiting for an answer.


----------



## kevindd992002

KedarWolf said:


> kevindd992002 said:
> 
> 
> 
> FYI, anyone can upgrade to the latest ME firmware of our Z370 boards by flashing the latest Consumer 11.8 RGN bin file using FWUpdate. So it's the same process when I did this for my old Z68 board in the past.
> @KedarWolf can confirm this as well. He already tried.
> 
> 
> 
> Still need to find out if you need to do the Engine CleanUp Guide stuff on the firmware before flashing it. I asked in WinRaid, waiting for an answer.
Click to expand...

You don't need that. He quoted the guy that uses a programmer. I'm assuming you don't have a programmer.

Follow the original post there regarding CSME 11. Nowhere does it say to use Engine Cleanup there. This is probably why he isn't replying to your post 🙂


----------



## Jpmboy

lol - way too many posts about flashing custom bios'. I've yet to see any performance reason for this....


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> lol - way too many posts about flashing custom bios'. I've yet to see any performance reason for this....


My post is about flashing the MEI to the latest one, mainly to address all the Intel security flaws and not performance. It's a simple one liner command in the cmd prompt 🙂 I'm with you on the "placebo effect" on better performance when downgrading the MEI.


----------



## feznz

So I am not the only one on this line of thinking I could understand if I were to be going for a world record but from my standpoint of gaming don't really need any more power.... well so far this year. 
Still thinking what the future will bring just started Fallout 4 again it was a game I really enjoyed so at the time didn't have a PC capable to play maxed out but the graphics are little old and watching GPU/CPU usage usually 60%/40% respectively gets me to the don't fix it if it isn't broken.
This time I will play to support the Minute men till the end actually got this game on steam so to keep a permanent copy I lost the key to the first copy I had.
Will it play Fallout 5 just have to wait n see, but dying to get Assassins Creed Odyssey


----------



## Robostyle

Since i've learned how to use thread search on this forum, I'll be better ask here 

Guys, I don't know if this is only mine system or it's everybody's case. The problem is - when adaptive or offset is used, voltage spikes at a ~0.05V value, from the value I set, type or calculate (in case it's offset), when booted. 
These spikes are unpredictable, they don't appear only under load or in idle. I can see those spikes whatever voltage/clocks I utilize. 
Here's the screenshots that will describe all the stuff better:
This is what I set in UEFI:
https://rog.asus.com/forum/attachmen...1&d=1532791809
And that's what I get after boot:
https://rog.asus.com/forum/attachmen...0&d=1532791710

Specs are:
awfull dud 8700K, capable of 5GHz only at 1.38V, and doesn't reacts anyhow on AVX offset.
Hero X wifi, 1602
2x16GB 3000MHz CL14 dualrank. 
Corsair RM750i - no complains about this one, at least from what I see in HWInfo and noise it produces (0)
LLC is set to level 5 - though, for 8700K the best would be LLC6 under manual voltage, I've noticed a small overshoot under offset and adaptive.
IA AC/DC lines are set to 0.01


----------



## wingman99

Robostyle said:


> Since i've learned how to use thread search on this forum, I'll be better ask here
> 
> Guys, I don't know if this is only mine system or it's everybody's case. The problem is - when adaptive or offset is used, voltage spikes at a ~0.05V value, from the value I set, type or calculate (in case it's offset), when booted.
> These spikes are unpredictable, they don't appear only under load or in idle. I can see those spikes whatever voltage/clocks I utilize.
> Here's the screenshots that will describe all the stuff better:
> This is what I set in UEFI:
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/attachmen...1&d=1532791809
> And that's what I get after boot:
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/attachmen...0&d=1532791710
> 
> Specs are:
> awfull dud 8700K, capable of 5GHz only at 1.38V, and doesn't reacts anyhow on AVX offset.
> Hero X wifi, 1602
> 2x16GB 3000MHz CL14 dualrank.
> Corsair RM750i - no complains about this one, at least from what I see in HWInfo and noise it produces (0)
> LLC is set to level 5 - though, for 8700K the best would be LLC6 under manual voltage, I've noticed a small overshoot under offset and adaptive.
> IA AC/DC lines are set to 0.01


The voltage fluctuations are normal when running stock default BIOS setting or Adaptive. The processor utilization will vary with different programs running including the OS. The Voltage with adaptive settings will save power when the processor commands reducing core voltage, then increasing core voltage for increased processor utilization.


----------



## Robostyle

wingman99 said:


> The voltage fluctuations are normal when running stock default BIOS setting or Adaptive. The processor utilization will vary with different programs running including the OS. The Voltage with adaptive settings will save power when the processor commands reducing core voltage, then increasing core voltage for increased processor utilization.


Nah, I'm not talking about voltage raise and drop between idle and load. I'm talking about consistency of "turbo" voltage. 
I dunno, maybe picture links are broken in previous post, I'll dublicate:

That's what I set in UEFI
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=214610&stc=1&d=1535314228
That's what I see after boot
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=214608&stc=1&d=1535314228

Don't you think 1.37V and 1.424V is a little bit away?


----------



## wingman99

Robostyle said:


> Nah, I'm not talking about voltage raise and drop between idle and load. I'm talking about consistency of "turbo" voltage.
> I dunno, maybe picture links are broken in previous post, I'll dublicate:
> 
> That's what I set in UEFI
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=214610&stc=1&d=1535314228
> That's what I see after boot
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=214608&stc=1&d=1535314228
> 
> Don't you think 1.37V and 1.424V is a little bit away?


I was not taking about voltage lowering and raising Idle and load that is old VID technology. SVID/DVID is newer Intel technology from year 2011 that also controls the voltage with turbo speeds. 

The voltage looks ok, that's about what my dynamic voltage has been for a year.


----------



## Robostyle

wingman99 said:


> I was not taking about voltage lowering and raising Idle and load that is old VID technology. SVID/DVID is newer Intel technology from year 2011 that also controls the voltage with turbo speeds.
> 
> The voltage looks ok, that's about what my dynamic voltage has been for a year.


Yeah, I noticed that major part of the time voltage is where it should be - 1.376v, however those spikes.....

Well, I would like to know more about this "bug feature" that was troubling me since I've migrated from 4790K. 
Some say this kind of behaviour new to intel. True? Moreover, I haven't noticed something like this back on Haswell.
And what's the reason for voltage to go higher than expected? From what I've seen, it's not like the AVX offset, or some kind of compensating overshoot. Is it intel, or motherboards manufacturers? 
And if it is normal, then, it's better not to use it with high voltages then? I really don't like the idea CPU being fed with >1.4V for 24/7 usage (more like 12/5 as of me) despite it's a mere seconds. Because, I don't know if it gonna impact on die's life and degradation, whilst current and wattage are fine, withing specs? 

I would be really thankful help in clarifying the stuff


----------



## GeneO

You might try using speed shift instead of speed step to see if that helps. The OS controls the voltage and boost with speed step. The processor controls voltage and boost with speed shift. 



If you have a load-line with a voltage droop that sees 1.376 under full load, then you are bound to see higher voltages at intermediate frequencies on the load line. These higher voltages occur at intermediate loads, so should not be much of a concern for 24x7.


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Nah, I'm not talking about voltage raise and drop between idle and load. I'm talking about consistency of "turbo" voltage.
> I dunno, maybe picture links are broken in previous post, I'll dublicate:
> 
> That's what I set in UEFI
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=214610&stc=1&d=1535314228
> That's what I see after boot
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=214608&stc=1&d=1535314228
> 
> Don't you think 1.37V and 1.424V is a little bit away?


if the voltage, _under load_ - is running higher than the set value, adjust LLC so that the vcore either stays level or droops some. It is best to allow for a healthy amount of droop as this "compensates" for load line overshoot that occurs during load transitions (micro sec scae). This property is called V_ovs by intel in their spec document. Ideally the idle state vcore shodl be higher than any of the load states (to see this with adaptive or offset set window power plan to High performance for this observation). On your Hero, pick a mid level LC (like 5 of 9). Lastly, unless you are using one of the more recent bioses (n-3 or 2) then in the Power setings, set IA AC and IA DC load lines to 0.01 each. Check the guide in my sig.
Also, HWI, CPUZ etc, can only read the vcore in 16mV increments (8-bit signal), so at certain _actual _values, it could range as much according to these OS-based tools.


----------



## ArneR

I'm almost certain that additional voltage is because of AVX. Every single one of the 8700k's and the one 8086k i've tested behaved similarly with adaptive vcore. It is preprogrammed into the VID table by intel, depending on what additional vcore they deemed necessary for your particular cpu. This is why many say at avx runs hot. 

The one in my system now asks for an additional 40mv during avx loads without using an avx offset. With an offset of 1 it asks for +10mv. E.g. vcore for 5.0GHz no avx is 1.335v LLC5, and 1,375v during avx. With offset 1 it runs at 1,345v. 

The very first 8700k I tested asked for an additional 60mv(!) during avx loads, and another cpu asked for +10mv during avx, but that one was a poor overclocker anyhow.

Try with an offset and report your findings in hwinfo64 back, as I said I'm almost certain your vcore "spikes" will be lower. Your cpu asks for an extra 35mv during avx, with an offset of 1 I'd bet it would be closer to 5mv.
Also, one thing I've noticed. VID will always be 5mv higher than you set the vcore to in bios, and consequently also your vcore reading if it fits with the 16mv readout.


----------



## wingman99

Robostyle said:


> Yeah, I noticed that major part of the time voltage is where it should be - 1.376v, however those spikes.....
> 
> Well, I would like to know more about this "bug feature" that was troubling me since I've migrated from 4790K.
> Some say this kind of behaviour new to intel. True? Moreover, I haven't noticed something like this back on Haswell.
> And what's the reason for voltage to go higher than expected? From what I've seen, it's not like the AVX offset, or some kind of compensating overshoot. Is it intel, or motherboards manufacturers?
> And if it is normal, then, it's better not to use it with high voltages then? I really don't like the idea CPU being fed with >1.4V for 24/7 usage (more like 12/5 as of me) despite it's a mere seconds. Because, I don't know if it gonna impact on die's life and degradation, whilst current and wattage are fine, withing specs?
> 
> I would be really thankful help in clarifying the stuff


SVID is used on all the Inlet OEM PCs in the world for power saving, it is well engineered not a bug. The 4790k has FIVR a Intel internal voltage regulator that does not show the spikes in software. The Voltage spikes happen when the VRM over shoots voltage when the AMPs are suddenly reduced and the VRM can't keep up with reducing the voltage fast enough. The voltage spikes with low AMPs and is not harmful.


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> if the voltage, _under load_ - is running higher than the set value, adjust LLC so that the vcore either stays level or droops some. It is best to allow for a healthy amount of droop as this "compensates" for load line overshoot that occurs during load transitions (micro sec scae). This property is called V_ovs by intel in their spec document. Ideally the idle state vcore shodl be higher than any of the load states (to see this with adaptive or offset set window power plan to High performance for this observation). On your Hero, pick a mid level LC (like 5 of 9). Lastly, unless you are using one of the more recent bioses (n-3 or 2) then in the Power setings, set IA AC and IA DC load lines to 0.01 each. Check the guide in my sig.
> Also, HWI, CPUZ etc, can only read the vcore in 16mV increments (8-bit signal), so at certain _actual _values, it could range as much according to these OS-based tools.


Yes, I'm using LLC5 (though LLC6 worked best for manual voltage sustain). AC/DC IA was set to 0.01 since the start - when I first booted my new rig, vCore went to 1.52 instantly, crazy stuff. It was 1101 bios back then.
The problem is, I can't allow any vdroop for my CPU. Otherwise I get WHEA or even BSoD if you keep it running longer. I've tried compensating this overshoot with vdroop, but it eventually became unstable. 

Let me explain on example of my CPU - my 8700K is capable of 5GHz only at 1.38V (manual). AVX offset doesn't work much - despite AVX clock being reduced, I am still unstable even if I drop vCore to 1.375V mark. With AVX offset! 
5GHz, no AVX offset - 1.38V - solid stable even under heavy AVX bombardment
5GHz, -5 AVX offset - 1.37V - WHEA one by one in 10 min
So, basically, AVX and nonAVX vCore requirements in my case are totally the same. 

I don't know if any of You guys here met such an exemplar....but that's what it is for me.

And that comes with adaptive. I've tried dropping voltage in adaptive mode in order to compensate overshoot - I've decreased this "target turbo" voltage, I've tried offsetting the slope in adaptive, I've tried lower LLC level. Nothing helped. Until I raised the thing so turbo voltage equals 1.38 with all those spikes over 1.42V



ArneR said:


> I'm almost certain that additional voltage is because of AVX. Every single one of the 8700k's and the one 8086k i've tested behaved similarly with adaptive vcore. It is preprogrammed into the VID table by intel, depending on what additional vcore they deemed necessary for your particular cpu. This is why many say at avx runs hot.
> The one in my system now asks for an additional 40mv during avx loads without using an avx offset. With an offset of 1 it asks for +10mv. E.g. vcore for 5.0GHz no avx is 1.335v LLC5, and 1,375v during avx. With offset 1 it runs at 1,345v.
> The very first 8700k I tested asked for an additional 60mv(!) during avx loads, and another cpu asked for +10mv during avx, but that one was a poor overclocker anyhow.
> Try with an offset and report your findings in hwinfo64 back, as I said I'm almost certain your vcore "spikes" will be lower. Your cpu asks for an extra 35mv during avx, with an offset of 1 I'd bet it would be closer to 5mv.
> Also, one thing I've noticed. VID will always be 5mv higher than you set the vcore to in bios, and consequently also your vcore reading if it fits with the 16mv readout.


Well, I have poor quality silicon, unfortunately. And, nope, spikes are not due to AVX workload, verified. Actually, when it's 100% load, spikes are only occasional. Moreover, even under AVX it remains stable at 1.38V mark, rarely spiking higher. 



wingman99 said:


> SVID is used on all the Inlet OEM PCs in the world for power saving, it is well engineered not a bug. The 4790k has FIVR a Intel internal voltage regulator that does not show the spikes in software. The Voltage spikes happen when the VRM over shoots voltage when the AMPs are suddenly reduced and the VRM can't keep up with reducing the voltage fast enough. The voltage spikes with low AMPs and is not harmful.


Well, that makes sense :thinking:


----------



## ViTosS

Can someone tell me how to update my IMEI or IME and what's the difference between these two? An easy way to update? Because I'm still using the one listed on official Asus site, which is from 2017.

Thanks!


----------



## kevindd992002

Is there any advantage of using AiSuite for our Z370 boards? I know there are a lot of bad stories with this ASUS software and I know they're still applicable up to today. My goal is to just adjust my rad fan speeds based on liquid temp on my loop. AFAIK, all you get with Fan Xpert is a GUI version of the settings that you have in the BIOS. So if it's just the GUI then I can forego that and just set everything in the BIOS.


----------



## kevindd992002

scracy said:


> T_Sensor probe works with AIDA64, Im using it for water temperature





GeneO said:


> Yes it is EFI, not EC. You can use it as a temperature source for fan control.


Looking at what I have with my Maximus X Code, here's an HWInfo screenshot:










So why is T_Sensor1 still under the ASUS EC but you can still use it as a monitor temperature in the BIOS?

Also, from what I can tell:

T1 = Motherboard Temp
T2 = CPU Temp

Why are there two sensors of each? What are Temp4 and Temp5 (they don't seem to be moving at all)?


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> Is there any advantage of using AiSuite for our Z370 boards? I know there are a lot of bad stories with this ASUS software and I know they're still applicable up to today. My goal is to just adjust my rad fan speeds based on liquid temp on my loop. AFAIK, all you get with Fan Xpert is a GUI version of the settings that you have in the BIOS. So if it's just the GUI then I can forego that and just set everything in the BIOS.


plug the in-line temp sensor into an on-board T-sensor header (like Water _In. I use this on my X Apex)


kevindd992002 said:


> Looking at what I have with my Maximus X Code, here's an HWInfo screenshot:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So why is T_Sensor1 still under the ASUS EC but you can still use it as a monitor temperature in the BIOS?
> 
> Also, from what I can tell:
> 
> T1 = Motherboard Temp
> T2 = CPU Temp
> 
> Why are there two sensors of each? What are Temp4 and Temp5 (they don't seem to be moving at all)?


When HWI first loaded did you opt to Ignore the EC signal(s)?


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> kevindd992002 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is there any advantage of using AiSuite for our Z370 boards? I know there are a lot of bad stories with this ASUS software and I know they're still applicable up to today. My goal is to just adjust my rad fan speeds based on liquid temp on my loop. AFAIK, all you get with Fan Xpert is a GUI version of the settings that you have in the BIOS. So if it's just the GUI then I can forego that and just set everything in the BIOS.
> 
> 
> 
> plug the in-line temp sensor into an on-board T-sensor header (like Water _In. I use this on my X Apex)
> 
> 
> kevindd992002 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looking at what I have with my Maximus X Code, here's an HWInfo screenshot:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So why is T_Sensor1 still under the ASUS EC but you can still use it as a monitor temperature in the BIOS?
> 
> Also, from what I can tell:
> 
> T1 = Motherboard Temp
> T2 = CPU Temp
> 
> Why are there two sensors of each? What are Temp4 and Temp5 (they don't seem to be moving at all)?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When HWI first loaded did you opt to Ignore the EC signal(s)?
Click to expand...

Right, I guess I should've worded my question about AISuite better. I already have the inline temp sensor plugged in to T_Sensor. I'm just wondering if there's even a slight advantage of using AISuite aside from having that GUI? Or just plainly use the BIOS/UEFI for fan control? Am I missing something if I don't use AISuite?

As for the HWInfo question, again I should've worded it better. Yes, I intentionally disabled EC monitoring (which is why you see the X's there) but that isn't what I wanted to know. @scracy and @GeneO mentioned a few months ago that the T_Sensor temp probe is not a non-EC probe. But HWInfo still lists it as an EC probe as shown in the picture. I know the VRM, W_in, and W_out probes are all EC probes so no question on that but T_Sensor should be non-EC.


----------



## scracy

kevindd992002 said:


> Right, I guess I should've worded my question about AISuite better. I already have the inline temp sensor plugged in to T_Sensor. I'm just wondering if there's even a slight advantage of using AISuite aside from having that GUI? Or just plainly use the BIOS/UEFI for fan control? Am I missing something if I don't use AISuite?
> 
> As for the HWInfo question, again I should've worded it better. Yes, I intentionally disabled EC monitoring (which is why you see the X's there) but that isn't what I wanted to know. @scracy and @GeneO mentioned a few months ago that the T_Sensor temp probe is not a non-EC probe. But HWInfo still lists it as an EC probe as shown in the picture. I know the VRM, W_in, and W_out probes are all EC probes so no question on that but T_Sensor should be non-EC.


I never stated that T_Sensor was a non-EC probe, in actual fact it is an EC probe so HWInfo64 software is correct in what it is showing, what I did state is that VRM temperature (also an EC probe) will not show up with AIDA64 because it does not appear under monitor tab in the UEFI  I use AIDA64 to monitor T1 _Sensor on my Formula board (for water temperature) if I tell AIDA64 to not monitor the EC then that T1_Sensor probe no longer displays.


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> Right, I guess I should've worded my question about AISuite better. I already have the inline temp sensor plugged in to T_Sensor. I'm just wondering if there's even a slight advantage of using AISuite aside from having that GUI? *Or just plainly use the BIOS/UEFI f*or fan control? Am I missing something if I don't use AISuite?
> 
> As for the HWInfo question, again I should've worded it better. Yes, I intentionally disabled EC monitoring (which is why you see the X's there) but that isn't what I wanted to know. @*scracy* and @*GeneO* mentioned a few months ago that the T_Sensor temp probe is not a non-EC probe. But HWInfo still lists it as an EC probe as shown in the picture. I know the VRM, W_in, and W_out probes are all EC probes so no question on that but T_Sensor should be non-EC.


just use the Bios controls. Easy.


----------



## kevindd992002

scracy said:


> I never stated that T_Sensor was a non-EC probe, in actual fact it is an EC probe so HWInfo64 software is correct in what it is showing, what I did state is that VRM temperature (also an EC probe) will not show up with AIDA64 because it does not appear under monitor tab in the UEFI  I use AIDA64 to monitor T1 _Sensor on my Formula board (for water temperature) if I tell AIDA64 to not monitor the EC then that T1_Sensor probe no longer displays.


Oops, it was actually @GeneO who said that, LOL.



Jpmboy said:


> just use the Bios controls. Easy.


Yeah, I figured as much. Is there any good guide to follow as to what thresholds to set for good fan control with liquid temp as the monitor temperature? I have 2x140mm front rad intake fans and 3x120mm top rad exhaust fans and I want to have positive pressure all throughout the load curve (from idle to load).


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> Oops, it was actually @*GeneO* who said that, LOL.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I figured as much. Is there any good guide to follow as to what thresholds to set for good fan control with liquid temp as the monitor temperature? I have 2x140mm front rad intake fans and 3x120mm top rad exhaust fans and I want to have positive pressure all throughout the load curve (from idle to load).


liquid temps shold not jump around like CPU temp, so a hysteresis is useful ( spin up/down delay). If you use the cold side temperature to control the fans, I'd suggest setting fans to 100% at 30C to 35C. I run an x299/7740X/1080 in one box with a single 360 rad. 2 PWM Fans ramp off the _Water in_ header , set for 100% at 30C, and it can manage Folding for weeks at a time - basically continuously for the past 2 months. 



(?? what's with the drag n drop picture thing tonight)


----------



## GeneO

kevindd992002 said:


> Oops, it was actually @*GeneO* who said that, LOL.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I figured as much. Is there any good guide to follow as to what thresholds to set for good fan control with liquid temp as the monitor temperature? I have 2x140mm front rad intake fans and 3x120mm top rad exhaust fans and I want to have positive pressure all throughout the load curve (from idle to load).



It is strange. The BIOS and AIDA64 can see the temperature sensor 1 but nothing else from EC like the VRM temperature. Makes you wonder what is going on.


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> liquid temps shold not jump around like CPU temp, so a hysteresis is useful ( spin up/down delay). If you use the cold side temperature to control the fans, I'd suggest setting fans to 100% at 30C to 35C. I run an x299/7740X/1080 in one box with a single 360 rad. 2 PWM Fans ramp off the _Water in_ header , set for 100% at 30C, and it can manage Folding for weeks at a time - basically continuously for the past 2 months.
> 
> 
> 
> (?? what's with the drag n drop picture thing tonight)


A hysteresis is useful for temps that are jumping around so that the fans won't change sporadically as temps change. If the liquid temps aren't "jumpy" as CPU temps, why would hysteresis useful? No pun intended, I just want to understand what you mean.

Also, what do you mean by "cold side temperature"? I live in a tropical country wherein the ambient temp is normally 33C so my idle liquid temps starts at 36C or so. I'm not sure what PWM speed (y value) and liquid temp (x value) should I set for the three data points for each fan control channel. Any ideas?


----------



## Robostyle

BTW, I'm curious what's the deal with "more overclockable" chips, when they run cooler - and that people tend to talk about? I've seen it all over, every overclocking guide stated that: "Delidded, with toptier aair cooler or water cooling, usually, vCore requirements for target OC frequency drop by ~0.05V"

I mean, I didn't noticed even a notch of an improvements regarding my CPU's overclocking potential, after I've delidded it, set D15 on it, changed afterwards to custom loop.


----------



## ArneR

Robostyle said:


> BTW, I'm curious what's the deal with "more overclockable" chips, when they run cooler - and that people tend to talk about? I've seen it all over, every overclocking guide stated that: "Delidded, with toptier aair cooler or water cooling, usually, vCore requirements for target OC frequency drop by ~0.05V"
> 
> I mean, I didn't noticed even a notch of an improvements regarding my CPU's overclocking potential, after I've delidded it, set D15 on it, changed afterwards to custom loop.


Less power leakage inside the silicon. Before I delidded mine I tried running it at 5.1GHz, it was semi stable but ran at 91*C and gave whea error. vcore was set to 1.375 before I terminated the endeavour. It probably would have been stable if I could give it another 10mv, but the temperatures were too high. 
After the delid though, it ran much cooler and I could drop the vcore down to 1.340v, max temp 69*C Prime95 small fft stable. However whatever I do I can't get this cpu stable (as stable as I want) at 5.2GHz, it just needs too much vcore for my liking. Heat is no longer a problem, it stays under 80*C during heavy testing.


----------



## Robostyle

ArneR said:


> Less power leakage inside the silicon. Before I delidded mine I tried running it at 5.1GHz, it was semi stable but ran at 91*C and gave whea error. vcore was set to 1.375 before I terminated the endeavour. It probably would have been stable if I could give it another 10mv, but the temperatures were too high.
> After the delid though, it ran much cooler and I could drop the vcore down to 1.340v, max temp 69*C Prime95 small fft stable. However whatever I do I can't get this cpu stable (as stable as I want) at 5.2GHz, it just needs too much vcore for my liking. Heat is no longer a problem, it stays under 80*C during heavy testing.


Can't grasp that....either my cpu is a dud, or I'm doin something wrong (despite I'm not). No improvements over non-delid, air cooled CPU. 
However, I must say, my CPU is SOMETHING "special", since avx offset doesn't help it at all, and other features that only this one has :wackosmil


----------



## ArneR

What do you mean by that, avx offset doesn't help? It doesn't lower the multiplier when under avx loads? Or something else?

It works fine for me, I use an offset of 1 to help offset some of that extra vcore being added when running adaptive vcore. Without it it adds 40mv to whatever adaptive vcore I set it to, which means it comes too close to my upper limit voltage wise. Though I can run it at 5.0/5.0 at 1.335v llc5 fine, but running avx it then goes to 1.375v, so instead I have it at 5.1/5.0 now, and vcore at 1,365v llc5, it then adds 10mv to that when running avx, ending up at the same voltage.

There are many cpu's that are "duds", I tested three others that were hotter and poor overclockers. Even the 8086k I tested was "bad", needing another 20mv over the one I ended up keeping for same frequencies and same stability.


----------



## Robostyle

ArneR said:


> What do you mean by that, avx offset doesn't help? It doesn't lower the multiplier when under avx loads? Or something else?
> 
> It works fine for me, I use an offset of 1 to help offset some of that extra vcore being added when running adaptive vcore. Without it it adds 40mv to whatever adaptive vcore I set it to, which means it comes too close to my upper limit voltage wise. Though I can run it at 5.0/5.0 at 1.335v llc5 fine, but running avx it then goes to 1.375v, so instead I have it at 5.1/5.0 now, and vcore at 1,365v llc5, it then adds 10mv to that when running avx, ending up at the same voltage.
> 
> There are many cpu's that are "duds", I tested three others that were hotter and poor overclockers. Even the 8086k I tested was "bad", needing another 20mv over the one I ended up keeping for same frequencies and same stability.


I mean, while multipler is being reduced under AVX workload, voltage requirements for nonAVX and AVX workloads, for my particular CPU are the same. 
E.x.:
5.0GHz, no offset, 1.39V manual, LLC6 - solid rock
5.1GHz, -1AVX offset, 1.39V - won't even boot
5.0GHz, -1AVX offset, 1.38V - WHEA all over. 

I even tried 1.38V and -5 AVX offset.... guess what?  
Right! WHEA

And ignore all those saying AVX doesn't comes with games - BF1 constantly hammer in AVX, maybe not that heavily as workloads, but it it. When I set AVX offset, my system always, every damn second runs on lowered clocks, occasionaly hiking up to non-offset values. And I don't know what else do I have in my system, that could run AVX instructions while in idle/in background.

Plus, two more interesting things:
1) Before I dellided it, I was able to run it on higher voltages only in games, you know, with 15-30% cpu load, with temps like ~80-90C. It waas only stable when I hit the voltage above 1.37. After delid, I've got maximum temps around ~70C with 55C average, neverless, it is still stable only at 1.37V and higher.
2) Voltage requirements for something like ARMA 3 and Prime95 hammering are the same. Like, if only 1 worker stops, without any WHEA - that doesn't mean the CPU will be enough stable for some light-CPU game.


----------



## ArneR

Could you do me a favour Robostyle? Hop on into your bios and save your current settings to an overclocking profile if you haven't already.

Then load optimized defaults, set AI overclock tuner to manual, not xmp and setting all core multi to synched at 47x, vcore to adaptive, and leave it on auto. Do not input anything. Digi+ set load line calibration to level 6, and make sure IA AC/DC loadlines are set to 0.01

Then you should boot into bios, set power plan to high performance, and take a note of what hwinfo64 reports under the field VID. Even windows use AVX periodically, so you will see a higher number under the max column.
These voltages are what are preprogrammed by Intel. If you have a decent chip these numbers are low, for example mine reports 1.260-1,300 and this is not good, but not bad either.

When you have these voltage numbers, it is quite easy to figure out where your chip lands in regards to good, bad or ugly.


----------



## Robostyle

ArneR said:


> Could you do me a favour Robostyle? Hop on into your bios and save your current settings to an overclocking profile if you haven't already.
> 
> Then load optimized defaults, set AI overclock tuner to manual, not xmp and setting all core multi to synched at 47x, vcore to adaptive, and leave it on auto. Do not input anything. Digi+ set load line calibration to level 6, and make sure IA AC/DC loadlines are set to 0.01
> 
> Then you should boot into bios, set power plan to high performance, and take a note of what hwinfo64 reports under the field VID. Even windows use AVX periodically, so you will see a higher number under the max column.
> These voltages are what are preprogrammed by Intel. If you have a decent chip these numbers are low, for example mine reports 1.260-1,300 and this is not good, but not bad either.
> 
> When you have these voltage numbers, it is quite easy to figure out where your chip lands in regards to good, bad or ugly.


Well, I don't know how that can help ya, but I'm good to help. 
Mine's CPU default's clocks VID are 1.275V and 1.31V respectively.
I thought since coffeelake they're all the same for entirely all CPUs produced.

P.S. I've started testing loop all over again, so far, without any memory, cache overclocked - pure cores OC - mine is completely stable at 5GHz only at 1.39V, LLC5. LLC6 may give slightly better results since it straights the whole slope, but for adaptive it's a little bit an overkill.

P.S. Guys? Could someone hint me - what's the voltage AVX offset in CoffeeLake-S?


----------



## ArneR

That helps a lot thanks. All cpus are different per se. Intel program in what vcore is needed on a per cpu basis at the factory. That is because of variations of silicon quality, as no cpu is the same as another. No matter if it is Coffe Lake or Kaby Lake, or even AMD Ryzen.

Anyway, as I pointed out in an earlier answer, your sample has a voltage offset of 35mv during avx. This corresponds perfectly with your "spikes" that you were concerned about. This is sadly perfectly normal if you use an Asus board and adaptive/offset vcore. This is simply because the motherboard use the preprogrammed vid table in those circumstances, and the only way to deviate from it is by using a negative offset, which in turn could introduce a lot of instability when not under turbo boost frequencies, or using manual vcore. But that might cause serious instability, if the cpu gets ~35mv less than needed under AVX loads. Remember, even Windows use AVX instructions, meaning the vcore will run at what it wants to. But this is no problem in itself, as the current through the cpu is low despite vcore being 1,4+

It is best to not mess with negative offsets at all, and just run with what Intel decided is suitable. 

Now, seeing that your chip has 15mv+35mv higher base than mine, I would see if another thing still holds true, and that is only upping the multi to 48x and leave all the rest as is. Your pc should be close to perfectly stable. This is because Intel err on the high side when determining VID. This is why some can obtain needed stability using a lower manual set vcore then the cpu would run at with adaptive. 
You may also test my statement that VID is reported 5mv higher than set vcore by inputing 1,270v to the field additional turbo voltage. Your reported VID and vcore will be identical to when set to auto. This is your lowest possible vcore the cpu will use for max turbo, any lower number will be ignored, unless using a negative offset. Meaning if your cpu was capable of it, it could run 5.0GHz at 1.275v. But don't mind that, it is all hypothetical.

Next step I would up the multi to 49x and add a few mv to get it stable and take notes of how much was needed. And so on. As an example, your milage may vary: Mine runs 99% stable at the same 1,255v set in bios 47x wants for 48x, I only add +5mv for 100%, 1,270v for 49x, and 1,305v for 50x. Finally 1,340v for 51x, and nothing I do will make it stable at 52x. You see how the voltage/frequency curve looks? The higher the freq. the higher vcore you need, and in the end you *will* come to a point where you will have to input significantly more vcore for that last 100MHz. This is end of the line, and you should go back one step from here. You might be right in that you have a "dud", and it's limit of diminishing returns might be as low as 49x. 
Remember all those voltages in my examples are with LLC6, e.g. a flat loadline. At a later time you can lower it to level 5 and up the vcore by say 30mv and see if vcore under load is where it was with it set to level 6. Now you have that needed vdroop, and a vcore that is sufficient for stability.

One last thing I would like to see, is how much the vcore offset lowers itself when using an AVX offset of 1. Mine drops from +40mv to+ 10mv as I said. Yours could drop the same amount, or only 20mv. Again, no cpu is the same, and there is no preset one size fits all avx offset voltage. Again, one of mine had an avx offset of +60mv, another +10mv, this one +40mv, and the 8086k +35mv like yours.



Robostyle said:


> P.S. I've started testing loop all over again, so far, without any memory, cache overclocked - pure cores OC - mine is completely stable at 5GHz only at 1.39V, LLC5. LLC6 may give slightly better results since it straights the whole slope, but for adaptive it's a little bit an overkill.


This imo is the only way to overclock, one thing at a time. Also a straight loadline is helpful too, meaning I would stick to level 6 during testing, and only going down to lvl5 when you have found your needed vcore at that frequency and load. All my examples are of no worth if you deviate from them, as the results would be skewed and not comparable.


----------



## Robostyle

ArneR said:


> That helps a lot thanks. All cpus are different per se. Intel program in what vcore is needed on a per cpu basis at the factory. That is because of variations of silicon quality, as no cpu is the same as another. No matter if it is Coffe Lake or Kaby Lake, or even AMD Ryzen.
> 
> Anyway, as I pointed out in an earlier answer, your sample has a voltage offset of 35mv during avx. This corresponds perfectly with your "spikes" that you were concerned about. This is sadly perfectly normal if you use an Asus board and adaptive/offset vcore. This is simply because the motherboard use the preprogrammed vid table in those circumstances, and the only way to deviate from it is by using a negative offset, which in turn could introduce a lot of instability when not under turbo boost frequencies, or using manual vcore. But that might cause serious instability, if the cpu gets ~35mv less than needed under AVX loads. Remember, even Windows use AVX instructions, meaning the vcore will run at what it wants to. But this is no problem in itself, as the current through the cpu is low despite vcore being 1,4+
> 
> It is best to not mess with negative offsets at all, and just run with what Intel decided is suitable.
> 
> Now, seeing that your chip has 15mv+35mv higher base than mine, I would see if another thing still holds true, and that is only upping the multi to 48x and leave all the rest as is. Your pc should be close to perfectly stable. This is because Intel err on the high side when determining VID. This is why some can obtain needed stability using a lower manual set vcore then the cpu would run at with adaptive.
> You may also test my statement that VID is reported 5mv higher than set vcore by inputing 1,270v to the field additional turbo voltage. Your reported VID and vcore will be identical to when set to auto. This is your lowest possible vcore the cpu will use for max turbo, any lower number will be ignored, unless using a negative offset. Meaning if your cpu was capable of it, it could run 5.0GHz at 1.275v. But don't mind that, it is all hypothetical.
> 
> Next step I would up the multi to 49x and add a few mv to get it stable and take notes of how much was needed. And so on. As an example, your milage may vary: Mine runs 99% stable at the same 1,255v set in bios 47x wants for 48x, I only add +5mv for 100%, 1,270v for 49x, and 1,305v for 50x. Finally 1,340v for 51x, and nothing I do will make it stable at 52x. You see how the voltage/frequency curve looks? The higher the freq. the higher vcore you need, and in the end you *will* come to a point where you will have to input significantly more vcore for that last 100MHz. This is end of the line, and you should go back one step from here. You might be right in that you have a "dud", and it's limit of diminishing returns might be as low as 49x.
> Remember all those voltages in my examples are with LLC6, e.g. a flat loadline. At a later time you can lower it to level 5 and up the vcore by say 30mv and see if vcore under load is where it was with it set to level 6. Now you have that needed vdroop, and a vcore that is sufficient for stability.
> 
> One last thing I would like to see, is how much the vcore offset lowers itself when using an AVX offset of 1. Mine drops from +40mv to+ 10mv as I said. Yours could drop the same amount, or only 20mv. Again, no cpu is the same, and there is no preset one size fits all avx offset voltage. Again, one of mine had an avx offset of +60mv, another +10mv, this one +40mv, and the 8086k +35mv like yours.


That's whaat I've been searchign for! And yeah, I just figured that out). Too bad I didn't knew it before, because I haven't used avx offset that much. It's more frustrating that those guys from rog forum didn't even tried to explain it that way, saying "relax, it's just what it is wit this platfrom, if u don't know why is it happening then you're dumb idiot that lacks "da knowledge(r)" and a 1000$ pack of measuring devices"

So, yeah, I've set AVX offset, only -2, set adaptive voltage to 1.36 + LLC6, and it completely smoothed it out. No spikes at all, looks just like the manual, waving from 1.36 to 1.376V all the time.


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> A hysteresis is useful for temps that are jumping around so that the fans won't change sporadically as temps change. If the liquid temps aren't "jumpy" as CPU temps, why would hysteresis useful? No pun intended, I just want to understand what you mean.
> 
> Also, what do you mean by "cold side temperature"? I live in a tropical country wherein the ambient temp is normally 33C so my idle liquid temps starts at 36C or so. I'm not sure what PWM speed (y value) and liquid temp (x value) should I set for the three data points for each fan control channel. Any ideas?



yeah - I worded that confusingly. You got it right, no hyster needed with water temp as the fan driver. What I mean by cold side temp is the water temp on the "out" side of the radiator (how about "cooler" side). Set the fan to ramp up to the max speed you want to use Before the loop reaches it's steady state temp. (lol - which is the water temp when all things are running at your intended use - like gaming - and the rad/fan system is shedding all the heat it is capable of). 





Robostyle said:


> BTW, I'm curious what's the deal with "more overclockable" chips, when they run cooler - and that people tend to talk about? I've seen it all over, every overclocking guide stated that: "Delidded, with toptier aair cooler or water cooling, usually, vCore requirements for target OC frequency drop by ~0.05V"
> 
> I mean, I didn't noticed even a notch of an improvements regarding my CPU's overclocking potential, after I've delidded it, set D15 on it, changed afterwards to custom loop.


in the ambient temp range, delidding will usually allow +100 MHz before your acceptable max temp is reached. Chips allscale differently with voltage, and the Hz/mV "line" is not straight. So finding the sweetspot for your sample is just before the cost of the next 100MHz goes well past 10mV per 100MHz per core (so on a 6 core, that's 60mV for one multiplier at 100 BCLK). You caan run a chip (well) beyond this, just know that the chip is operating off the linear portion of the Hz/mV curve.


----------



## ArneR

Robostyle said:


> That's whaat I've been searchign for! And yeah, I just figured that out). Too bad I didn't knew it before, because I haven't used avx offset that much. It's more frustrating that those guys from rog forum didn't even tried to explain it that way, saying "relax, it's just what it is wit this platfrom, if u don't know why is it happening then you're dumb idiot that lacks "da knowledge(r)" and a 1000$ pack of measuring devices"
> 
> So, yeah, I've set AVX offset, only -2, set adaptive voltage to 1.36 + LLC6, and it completely smoothed it out. No spikes at all, looks just like the manual, waving from 1.36 to 1.376V all the time.


Good. I'm glad I could be of help.  I'm still curious to hear what your avx offset voltage is with an avx offset of -1 though. The fluctuations in reported vcore is normal with 16mv increments, it might just be that the actual vcore is inbetween the two readings. I'd hope to see if you could lower the vcore a tad and still be stable. Also I don't remember if you said what you are testing for stability with. 

Me personally use Prime95 29.4 in two separate folders, and in the local.txt I've put "CpuSupportsFMA3=0" for the one I test AVX with, and "CpuSupportsAVX=0" in the one for testing without.
I usually start with custom->12 threads->min and max fft size 1344K and check the box "run fft's in-place. I run that for some time, keeping an eye out for WHEA errors reported in hwinfo64, and when I'm happy with that I run small fft's for a while. This usually brings out the unstability rather quick for me, either by straight BSOD or WHEA errors in hwinfo64. If you get a BSOD you are quite some distance away from stable, but WHEA errors usually dissapears with 5-10mv more vcore.


----------



## Robostyle

ArneR said:


> Good. I'm glad I could be of help.  I'm still curious to hear what your avx offset voltage is with an avx offset of -1 though. The fluctuations in reported vcore is normal with 16mv increments, it might just be that the actual vcore is inbetween the two readings. I'd hope to see if you could lower the vcore a tad and still be stable. Also I don't remember if you said what you are testing for stability with.
> 
> Me personally use Prime95 29.4 in two separate folders, and in the local.txt I've put "CpuSupportsFMA3=0" for the one I test AVX with, and "CpuSupportsAVX=0" in the one for testing without.
> I usually start with custom->12 threads->min and max fft size 1344K and check the box "run fft's in-place. I run that for some time, keeping an eye out for WHEA errors reported in hwinfo64, and when I'm happy with that I run small fft's for a while. This usually brings out the unstability rather quick for me, either by straight BSOD or WHEA errors in hwinfo64. If you get a BSOD you are quite some distance away from stable, but WHEA errors usually dissapears with 5-10mv more vcore.


I use everything totally the same, the latest prime version (in case it doesn't have bugs or "hammering" issues), sometimes AIDA test for light load, HWInfo for whea check-up. In case I don't want/have enough time, for games/light workload etc., I just type the voltage I think would be sufficient, monitoring errors in HWinfo while working/gaming. 

As for -1 offset, voltage spiked a little with aan AVX - 1.392V. All in all, without offset, maximum voltaage waas 1.408V. 
All the settings tested with LLC6. 
Though, I'm not sure that CPU's voltage offset corresponds to what it REALLY needs to be stable - I mean, it might be enough 1.408V to keep it stable under AVX, but 1.36V is not enough for nonAVX workload.

Or, maybe, it was all about transition issues - as an example, BF1, that makes cpu constanty switch beteen avx and non avx


----------



## ArneR

Robostyle said:


> I use everything totally the same, the latest prime version (in case it doesn't have bugs or "hammering" issues), sometimes AIDA test for light load, HWInfo for whea check-up. In case I don't want/have enough time, for games/light workload etc., I just type the voltage I think would be sufficient, monitoring errors in HWinfo while working/gaming.
> 
> As for -1 offset, voltage spiked a little with aan AVX - 1.392V. All in all, without offset, maximum voltaage waas 1.408V.
> All the settings tested with LLC6.
> Though, I'm not sure that CPU's voltage offset corresponds to what it REALLY needs to be stable - I mean, it might be enough 1.408V to keep it stable under AVX, but 1.36V is not enough for nonAVX workload.
> 
> Or, maybe, it was all about transition issues - as an example, BF1, that makes cpu constanty switch beteen avx and non avx


Ok. I use VID to determine what the offset really is, since vcore is reported in 16mv increments it is not fine enough to really get an accurate measurement. What does VID say in your case with an avx offset of -1? 

That is correct, and the reason there is added vcore under avx in the first place. However, with an avx offset you also offset what VID the cpu asks for at that multi, for example 49x. They do not correspond exactly though, the cpu doesn't ask for the same VID under avx load at 50x normal / 49x avx as 49x/49x.

I trust the VID table and the magic of letting the cpu do it's thing on it's own, if using a flat loadline I've yet to see it crash during avx testing, both with and without an offset. In my case with an offset of -1 the VID asks for an additional 10mv over what I set as vcore, and that I can live with no problem. 

And remember, whatever you set as vcore, VID will be 5mv over that, e.g. 1.300v is 1.305VID. Why this is a thing I don't know, but I just like to keep it in my mind when I'm fiddling with overclocks.

I too find it easier to achieve stability during avx than without, it's may very well be that Intel overdid it with the offset voltages, but better safe than sorry?  I wish there were two separate vcores in bios or a place you could set a small negative offset for avx, so you could find the optimal vcore for both scenarios.


----------



## Jpmboy

remember - it is not uncommon for the 8700K and 8086K toi have a VID that is _higher _than the vcore necessary for a given OC. Actually, it is quite common. Both my 8700K and 8086K have this issue (especially the 8086K), so ANY VID-based voltage control (adaptive or offset) will run high. The best method to deal with this is Manual override.


adaptive can only add voltage to the VID, offset can run negative, but you run the risk of light load undervolting since it lowers the vcore across all frequencies in the stack.


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> remember - it is not uncommon for the 8700K and 8086K toi have a VID that is _higher _than the vcore necessary for a given OC. Actually, it is quite common. Both my 8700K and 8086K have this issue (especially the 8086K), so ANY VID-based voltage control (adaptive or offset) will run high. The best method to deal with this is Manual override.
> 
> 
> adaptive can only add voltage to the VID, offset can run negative, but you run the risk of light load undervolting since it lowers the vcore across all frequencies in the stack.


Yes, it actually does. I can say, my silicon is completely stable at 4.8GHz within 1.248V. I mean, I didn't hammered it with 72hours of Prime - but I happily lived for a 3 months with settings: 4.8GHz, no offset, 4.5 uncore at 1.248V, with CPU load over 90% time to time. No WHEA for 3 months. I guess, I would have run in troubles with those settings, taking into account 4.7GHz SVID values, right?



ArneR said:


> Ok. I use VID to determine what the offset really is, since vcore is reported in 16mv increments it is not fine enough to really get an accurate measurement. What does VID say in your case with an avx offset of -1?
> 
> That is correct, and the reason there is added vcore under avx in the first place. However, with an avx offset you also offset what VID the cpu asks for at that multi, for example 49x. They do not correspond exactly though, the cpu doesn't ask for the same VID under avx load at 50x normal / 49x avx as 49x/49x.
> 
> I trust the VID table and the magic of letting the cpu do it's thing on it's own, if using a flat loadline I've yet to see it crash during avx testing, both with and without an offset. In my case with an offset of -1 the VID asks for an additional 10mv over what I set as vcore, and that I can live with no problem.
> 
> And remember, whatever you set as vcore, VID will be 5mv over that, e.g. 1.300v is 1.305VID. Why this is a thing I don't know, but I just like to keep it in my mind when I'm fiddling with overclocks.
> 
> I too find it easier to achieve stability during avx than without, it's may very well be that Intel overdid it with the offset voltages, but better safe than sorry?  I wish there were two separate vcores in bios or a place you could set a small negative offset for avx, so you could find the optimal vcore for both scenarios.



At least, with manual You still have a chance to completely override the voltage, thus finding out voltage requirements for, hypothetically, toughest scenario - AVX 100% cpu load hammering. 

Then, again, it looks like all-around advice "to dial the same, as in manual, numbers in "additional turbo voltage" box" - is incorrect. 
Simply said, when You use manual voltage, without offset or something like that - you remember about AVX heightened voltage requirments, stable CPU with X manual voltage means it is stable in every scenario. 
While at the same time, adaptive voltage box means nonAVX voltage - for AVX, and offset will automatically kick in. 

At least, I understand it that way.

P.S. Yeah, BTW, 
With an AVX offset by 1,
VID with nonAVX - *1.365V]*
VID with AVX - *1.369V*

With an AVX offset by 2, VID with AVX was *1.364V*
0.005V for 100 mhz increment?


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Yes, it actually does. I can say, my silicon is completely stable at 4.8GHz within 1.248V. I mean, I didn't hammered it with 72hours of Prime - but I happily lived for a 3 months with settings: 4.8GHz, no offset, 4.5 uncore at 1.248V, with CPU load over 90% time to time. No WHEA for 3 months. I guess, I would have run in troubles with those settings, taking into account 4.7GHz SVID values, right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least, with manual You still have a chance to completely override the voltage, thus finding out voltage requirements for, hypothetically, toughest scenario - AVX 100% cpu load hammering.
> 
> Then, again, it looks like all-around advice *"to dial the same, as in manual, numbers in "additional turbo voltage" box" - is incorrect. *
> Simply said, when You use manual voltage, without offset or something like that - you remember about AVX heightened voltage requirments, stable CPU with X manual voltage means it is stable in every scenario.
> While at the same time, adaptive voltage box means nonAVX voltage - for AVX, and offset will automatically kick in.
> 
> At least, I understand it that way.
> 
> P.S. Yeah, BTW,
> With an AVX offset by 1,
> VID with nonAVX - *1.365V]*
> VID with AVX - *1.369V*
> 
> With an AVX offset by 2, VID with AVX was *1.364V*
> 0.005V for 100 mhz increment?



the avx offset is applied to the high multiplier in the stack, it will not affect the VID the offset or ATV is based upon - would be nice if it did, especially on HCC chips where we use AVX512 offsets of -10!). Also, basically, once you overclock, VID is meaningless since you are running multipliers higher than the certified max freq, really should just be ignored. Vcore is the thing to monitor. 

No it is not incorrect to enter the manual override voltage into adaptive... unless the chip's VID is higher than the entered voltage. Adaptive is ADDITIONAL turbo voltage, is can only add voltage, or not by design. When th eVID is higher, the VID is used. This is stuff we walked everyone thru when the platform launched (also applied to every architecture back to Sandy).When VID is higher than the required voltage, use manual override or offset. 



Also - the vcore or VIDs you bolded above are all identical. The signal to the OS is not near that precise. Use a DMM to measure mV if you want siggle digit mV accuracy (and better have a very good, zero-point calibrated DMM, reading directly from the socket  )


----------



## Robostyle

Ok, I see. 
BTW, what about such a thing - I've noticed that under adaptive, core's VIDs are overrided. They exactly correspond the voltage I set in UEFI. 

And about additional turbo voltage - as an example: I test my rig for stable voltages, at 5GHz allcore, without any offset or other stuff beind OC'ed. And, for instance, I get result of manual 1.35V and CPU completely stable at 5GHz
+ in stock, it has positive offset of 0.035V for heavy workloads. 

Doesn't that mean, that for adaptive, I can dial something like "1.315V" - and it will be stable?


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Ok, I see.
> BTW, what about such a thing - I've noticed that under adaptive, core's VIDs are overrided. They exactly correspond the voltage I set in UEFI.
> 
> And about additional turbo voltage - as an example: I test my rig for stable voltages, at 5GHz allcore, without any offset or other stuff beind OC'ed. And, for instance, I get result of manual 1.35V and CPU completely stable at 5GHz
> + in stock, it has positive offset of 0.035V for heavy workloads.
> 
> Doesn't that mean, that for adaptive, I can dial something like "1.315V" - and it will be stable?



no - that is most likely LLC adding vcore under load, when it should be set to lower vcore slightly under high-current loads. Have you read the guide linked in my signature block? If not, when using manual override, allow for some vdroop (20 to 50mV) under p95 or IBT or x264/x264 loads. The droop is there to mitigate transient overshoot when the curent flow changes (a basic property of any voltage-clamped system when current (read: load) changes). You cannot see this over and undershoot without special equipment.


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> no - that is most likely LLC adding vcore under load, when it should be set to lower vcore slightly under high-current loads. Have you read the guide linked in my signature block? If not, when using manual override, allow for some vdroop (20 to 50mV) under p95 or IBT or x264/x264 loads. The droop is there to mitigate transient overshoot when the curent flow changes (a basic property of any voltage-clamped system when current (read: load) changes). You cannot see this over and undershoot without special equipment.


Actually, I meant adaptive. I've got the idea about vdroop from manual  
That comes for the adaptive - since avx offset kicks in, regardless of what you type as turbovoltage, I've tried lowering adaptive vcore at 0.035v, so far it's stable both in AVX and nonAVX prime torture.
During avx, it sustains stable at 5GHz all core, vcore hikes up to 1.408V. NonAVX torture gives out stable vcore at 1.36v, 5GHz allcore - and no whea I've seen yet.
So, that comes to what I've meant - when I was testing rig for stable 5GHz, no offset or any kind of pampering - I've bumped in 1.39V mark. It was only stable voltage for 5GHz, avx aswell, allcore.
For adaptive, I use 1.36V, since aditional turbo voltage means nonAVX voltage override. For AVX, it will spike at 0.035V mark. That's how I see it now, so just asking if it's correct, true? 
Adaptive turbo is set to 1.35V, so yeah, LLC6 gives some overshoot, I'll stick to lvl5 afterwards. 



Spoiler



And yeah, I definitely need new multimeter - the one I have right now is an old soviet garbage, like, 35 years old ;D


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Actually, I meant adaptive. I've got the idea about vdroop from manual
> That comes for the adaptive - since avx offset kicks in, regardless of what you type as turbovoltage, I've tried lowering adaptive vcore at 0.035v, so far it's stable both in AVX and nonAVX prime torture.
> During avx, it sustains stable at 5GHz all core, vcore hikes up to 1.408V. NonAVX torture gives out stable vcore at 1.36v, 5GHz allcore - and no whea I've seen yet.
> So, that comes to what I've meant - when I was testing rig for stable 5GHz, no offset or any kind of pampering - I've bumped in 1.39V mark. It was only stable voltage for 5GHz, avx aswell, allcore.
> F*or adaptive, I use 1.36V, since aditional turbo voltage means nonAVX voltage override*. *For AVX, it will spike at 0.035V mark.* That's how I see it now, so just asking if it's correct, true?
> Adaptive turbo is set to 1.35V, so yeah, LLC6 gives some overshoot, I'll stick to lvl5 afterwards.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> And yeah, I definitely need new multimeter - the one I have right now is an old soviet garbage, like, 35 years old ;D



i don't understand what you are asking here.


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> i don't understand what you are asking here.


You've claimed (in guide, as well as other guides accessable over internet) , that the mimimum required adaptive voltage should be equal to that you figure with manual voltage, right? That you should "Enter the same voltage into Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage that you had for Manual"

But I've noticed, that adaptive mimimum voltage value differs from the one you might need when using manual - due to AVX voltage offset, that doesn't work with manual override, but does work in adaptive mode. 
That's what I was asking about - why you should enter the same value that I've had in manual - if I should enter a little bit lower value, to compensate AVX offset spike?


----------



## GeneO

Robostyle said:


> You've claimed (in guide, as well as other guides accessable over internet) , that the mimimum required adaptive voltage should be equal to that you figure with manual voltage, right? That you should "Enter the same voltage into Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage that you had for Manual"
> 
> But I've noticed, that adaptive mimimum voltage value differs from the one you might need when using manual - due to AVX voltage offset, that doesn't work with manual override, but does work in adaptive mode.
> That's what I was asking about - why you should enter the same value that I've had in manual - if I should enter a little bit lower value, to compensate AVX offset spike?



nm. out of context


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> You've claimed (in guide, as well as other guides accessable over internet) , that the mimimum required adaptive voltage should be equal to that you figure with manual voltage, right? That you should "Enter the same voltage into Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage that you had for Manual"
> 
> But I've noticed, that adaptive mimimum voltage value differs from the one you might need when using manual - *due to AVX voltage offset,* that doesn't work with manual override, but does work in adaptive mode.
> That's what I was asking about - why you should enter the same value that I've had in manual - if I should enter a little bit lower value,* to compensate AVX offset spike*?


okay - that's more clear. There is no AVX voltage offset or spike (as I said before, I which we had an AVX voltage rail to control), what you are seeing is manual override, overriding the VID and Adaptive using the VID. This means that for the frequency and load you are subjecting the Adaptive vcore to, the VID is higher than the entered adaptive vcore. (dynamic voltage and frequency require the VID com link - hence why adaptive option only appears with SVID set to enabled or Auto). 

Again, the best way to deal with this is to override the VID, and set all c-states to Enabled. Your system will enter a low power state on a per core basis when idle for extended periods (maybe 2-5watt higher - this is only because any "wake" core gets the manual override voltage, not a non-turbo voltage like 0.85V). Disable speed step, and enable speed shift in bios if you are using windows 10.

You need to realize that your problem is all about having a CPU that runs stable below the pre-programmed VID. You're a silicon lottery winner - enjoy!


----------



## Jpmboy

GeneO said:


> I think that is just meant as a starting point. You will need more or less depending on your LLC level and Vdroop. You put the same load on the processor and then adjust the additional turbo voltage so you have the same Vcore under load as with manual voltage under load.


^^ or this. :thumb:


----------



## Robostyle

What does mean CPU standy voltage? What it has an impact on?


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> What does mean CPU standy voltage? What it has an impact on?


 unless you are running >5200, just leave this on auto. for my 8700K(ES) and 8086K, 1.2V is sufficient for frequencies up to 5500. Left on auto, it will run to 1.5V, which is okay, but probably not necessary.
VCCST_A in HWinfo64
*Check Raja's KBL guide*

Here is an example (my 8086K) with a VID well above the vcore needed for 5200. Hence I run manual override. Adaptive will run vcore higher than needed for this frequency


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> unless you are running >5200, just leave this on auto. for my 8700K(ES) and 8086K, 1.2V is sufficient for frequencies up to 5500. Left on auto, it will run to 1.5V, which is okay, but probably not necessary.
> VCCST_A in HWinfo64
> *Check Raja's KBL guide*
> 
> Here is an example (my 8086K) with a VID well above the vcore needed for 5200. Hence I run manual override. Adaptive will run vcore higher than needed for this frequency


Yeah, nice chip. 

BTW, how did You've achieved such a low temps? I mean, I get about cpu&gpu, but m/b, ram?


----------



## Jpmboy

delided , custom water, open bench


----------



## Robostyle

Wait.....
How do You get 27-28C on RAM, VRM and GPU, if they're not watercooled?

P.S. What else can I check, exept of increasing vRAM and vSA/vIO, in order to stabilize my RAM at desired clocks?


----------



## Jpmboy

what ram kit and what timings/frequencies?


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> what ram kit and what timings/frequencies?


G.Skill F4-3000C14D-32GTZR, Trident Z RGB 16GBx2 3000MHz 14-14-14-34 ram kit

Trying to spell them to run 3200MHz at the same CL. No success atm, errors in Prime and AIDA
I've almost lost hope to run them above 3600MHz.... Even 4000MHz CL20 isn't good. Qcodes I've seen so far: 6A, 6F, AC. 

Even tried to OC it with CPU at stock.


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> G.Skill F4-3000C14D-32GTZR, Trident Z RGB 16GBx2 3000MHz 14-14-14-34 ram kit
> 
> Trying to spell them to run 3200MHz at the same CL. No success atm, errors in Prime and AIDA
> I've almost lost hope to run them above 3600MHz.... Even 4000MHz CL20 isn't good. Qcodes I've seen so far: 6A, 6F, AC.
> 
> Even tried to OC it with CPU at stock.


16GB sticks are not gona be easy (or very limited). The best overclocking stick are 8GB samsung (G. skill, corsair...). prime and AID64 are not very good at testing ram. Things like GSAT, HCi memtest or RamTest are way better. 

Bring ram questions here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-146.html#post27605408


----------



## ViTosS

Can someone tell me how to update my IMEI/IME? I'm still at the old one from official Asus website (2017).


----------



## KedarWolf

ViTosS said:


> Can someone tell me how to update my IMEI/IME? I'm still at the old one from official Asus website (2017).


Download Intel CSME 11.8 Consumer PCH-H Firmware v11.8.55.3510 from here. 

https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html

Also, download 'Intel CSME System Tools v11 r14 - (2018-08-09)'.

From the Intel CSME System Tools v11 r14 'FWUpdate' folder copy the WIN32 folder to your D: drive. Extract the CSME 11.8 Consumer PCH-H Firmware v11.8.55.3510 and put it in the WIN32 folder.

Open an admin command prompt. Go to the D:\WIN32 folder.

In the command prompt 'FWUpdLcl.exe -F 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin' without the quotations, reboot.


----------



## Robostyle

Is there any software or app, highly usable, that could display both voltages and currents at the same time, in graphs?


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Is there any software or app, highly usable, that could display both voltages and currents at the same time, in graphs?



aid64


----------



## ViTosS

KedarWolf said:


> Download Intel CSME 11.8 Consumer PCH-H Firmware v11.8.55.3510 from here.
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html
> 
> Also, download 'Intel CSME System Tools v11 r14 - (2018-08-09)'.
> 
> From the Intel CSME System Tools v11 r14 'FWUpdate' folder copy the WIN32 folder to your D: drive. Extract the CSME 11.8 Consumer PCH-H Firmware v11.8.55.3510 and put it in the WIN32 folder.
> 
> Open an admin command prompt. Go to the D:\WIN32 folder.
> 
> In the command prompt 'FWUpdLcl.exe -F 11.8.55.3510_CON_H_D0_PRD_RGN.bin' without the quotations, reboot.


Thank you, can you confirm for i7 8700k the latest MEI is Intel MEI Driver v11.7.0.1069 MEI-Only Installer, right?


----------



## KedarWolf

ViTosS said:


> Thank you, can you confirm for i7 8700k the latest MEI is Intel MEI Driver v11.7.0.1069 MEI-Only Installer, right?


That's the latest with the .exe installer but you can install a later version 'Intel MEI Driver v1815.12.0.2021 (Windows 8 & Windows 10)' from an .inf file.


----------



## ViTosS

KedarWolf said:


> That's the latest with the .exe installer but you can install a later version 'Intel MEI Driver v1815.12.0.2021 (Windows 8 & Windows 10)' from an .inf file.


But there says ''The latest v12.0 drivers are usable with 8-series Broadwell mobile...''

Isn't those ones for mobile only?


----------



## ViTosS

Well I pointed manually to update driver for my IMEI and it says already using the latest driver (11.7.0.1057), at device manager....


----------



## ViTosS

Just one more question, from the 

Intel CSME System Tools v11 r14 - (2018-08-09)
For 100/200/Z370/H310C/X299/C400/C620-series systems which come with CSME v11

I went to the MEInfo tool for x64 and executed the .exe there to check how is my firmware and ME but it opens a CMD very fast with letters in the screen and closes, is this normal?


----------



## KedarWolf

ViTosS said:


> But there says ''The latest v12.0 drivers are usable with 8-series Broadwell mobile...''
> 
> Isn't those ones for mobile only?



The latest v12.0 drivers are usable with 8-series Broadwell mobile & *100-series or newer desktop/mobile systems (CS(ME) >= 10)*

Your ME is greater than version 10.


Note: The MEI drivers listed above are part of the complete Drivers & Software packages found at section A3. A newer Drivers & Software package has newer Software but the actual MEI driver may still be an older version. MEI-Only Installer v1828.12.0.1151 includes MEI v1815.12.0.2021. MEI-Only Installer v11.7.0.1069 includes MEI v11.7.0.1057. MEI-Only Installer v11.0.6.1194 includes MEI v11.0.5.1189.

Note: The MEI-Only Installer includes the "INF for manual installation" and allows easy installation of the latter. However, since we cannot always find the latest MEI-Only Installer, it is advised to use the "INF for manual installation" in case its version is newer.


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> aid64


Anything more usable? Cause AIDA doesn't show time lapses. 
I still get those spikes . even with LLC5. And I have feeling it's not about low currents


----------



## Jpmboy

if this is not good enough, then you need an aquaero and it's data logging to a file, or pro EE gear


----------



## ViTosS

KedarWolf said:


> The latest v12.0 drivers are usable with 8-series Broadwell mobile & *100-series or newer desktop/mobile systems (CS(ME) >= 10)*
> 
> Your ME is greater than version 10.
> 
> 
> Note: The MEI drivers listed above are part of the complete Drivers & Software packages found at section A3. A newer Drivers & Software package has newer Software but the actual MEI driver may still be an older version. MEI-Only Installer v1828.12.0.1151 includes MEI v1815.12.0.2021. MEI-Only Installer v11.7.0.1069 includes MEI v11.7.0.1057. MEI-Only Installer v11.0.6.1194 includes MEI v11.0.5.1189.
> 
> Note: The MEI-Only Installer includes the "INF for manual installation" and allows easy installation of the latter. However, since we cannot always find the latest MEI-Only Installer, it is advised to use the "INF for manual installation" in case its version is newer.


Thank you, I installed it now, I tried to use the MEInfo.exe inside the Intel CSME System Tools v11 r14, the WIN64 folder and it opens up fast and then closes, opens a CMD and there are listed somethings and it closes, do you know why? I tried to use it to check the info from the firmware and the ME version, like said in the tutorial, but it doesn't let me see what it does before close.


----------



## GeneO

ViTosS said:


> Thank you, I installed it now, I tried to use the MEInfo.exe inside the Intel CSME System Tools v11 r14, the WIN64 folder and it opens up fast and then closes, opens a CMD and there are listed somethings and it closes, do you know why? I tried to use it to check the info from the firmware and the ME version, like said in the tutorial, but it doesn't let me see what it does before close.



From command line run "meinfo -verbose output.txt"


It will write the output to the file output.txt


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> if this is not good enough, then you need an aquaero and it's data logging to a file, or pro EE gear


So, I've used hwinfo graphs in order to detect spikes and voltage with which they occur. 
And it doesn't look like low current, or load transtiton. Since I've turned LLC5, it became constant 30mV overshoot, no matter what current CPU get. 
I experience this overshoots everywhere - office, surfing, gaming, decoding - everywhere exept benches and stresstests with constant 100% workload.


And the only way I've got rid of those spikes - AVX offset. -1 offset got the voltages stricked like if it was manual voltage - it never goes higher than the value I've entered in UEFI. 

So, how to explain this?


----------



## ViTosS

GeneO said:


> From command line run "meinfo -verbose output.txt"
> 
> 
> It will write the output to the file output.txt


Can you tell me how do I do that?


----------



## GeneO

ViTosS said:


> Can you tell me how do I do that?


Open a command-prompt window by right clicking on start menu

cd to the folder where the MEInfo executable is (in example here C:\MEInfo
run the executable with the -verbose <output-filename> switch:


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> Open a command-prompt window by right clicking on start menu
> 
> cd to the folder where the MEInfo executable is (in example here C:\MEInfo
> run the executable with the -verbose <output-filename> switch:


After flashing the IME you can check it in the BIOS under 'Info'.


----------



## ViTosS

GeneO said:


> Open a command-prompt window by right clicking on start menu
> 
> cd to the folder where the MEInfo executable is (in example here C:\MEInfo
> run the executable with the -verbose <output-filename> switch:


Thank you! I will do that, but there is no need to worry because I executed many times the file? I mean, does it install something or just reports the system info? Worried about installing something over and over again and screwing the SO.


----------



## GAN77

Hi guys!

Below the photo board X Hero WiFi Rev.1.01

VRM motherboard similarly code.



What do you think? Are there owners?


----------



## bl4ckdot

GAN77 said:


> Hi guys!
> 
> Below the photo board X Hero WiFi Rev.1.01
> 
> VRM motherboard similarly code.
> 
> 
> 
> What do you think? Are there owners?



That's interesting. IIRC, it's not very often that ASUS do revision for their boards


----------



## DerekAz

Mine is rev 1.01

Purchased approximately in July but just actually got the new build running the other day. It has bios version 1802 in it, any benefits to updating to newer bios, any recommendations?

Thanks

Just a guy trying to avoid the cow pies of life.


----------



## encrypted11

I had a rev 1.01 Maximus X Hero around October 2017 time frame without VRM temperature monitoring. That's not a new revision.


----------



## GAN77

DerekAz said:


> Mine is rev 1.01
> 
> Purchased approximately in July but just actually got the new build running the other day. It has bios version 1802 in it, any benefits to updating to newer bios, any recommendations?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Just a guy trying to avoid the cow pies of life.


Bios 1802? 
On the site asus the last bios 1602.


----------



## GAN77

encrypted11 said:


> I had a rev 1.01 Maximus X Hero around October 2017 time frame without VRM temperature monitoring. That's not a new revision.


Compare your board with my photo and follow the link
http://bbs.nga.cn/read.php?tid=14524219&page=10&rand=580


----------



## encrypted11

I don't own a M10H anymore, but this is a pic I can supply.




Spoiler


----------



## Robostyle

GAN77 said:


> Bios 1802?
> On the site asus the last bios 1602.


1802 is only 9900K compatible (sic!) 

P.S. Just Joking....or not?


----------



## DerekAz

*Dyslexic Moment....*



GAN77 said:


> Bios 1802?
> On the site asus the last bios 1602.


Sorry....0802


----------



## Robostyle

Couple of questions regaarding voltage:

1) Is there any impact on vCore requirement with high-speed RAM?
2) How can I diagnose, if vSA and vIO supplies are insufficient for the CPU? Does WHEA cache errors have something to do with those two?


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> yeah - I worded that confusingly. You got it right, no hyster needed with water temp as the fan driver. What I mean by cold side temp is the water temp on the "out" side of the radiator (how about "cooler" side). Set the fan to ramp up to the max speed you want to use Before the loop reaches it's steady state temp. (lol - which is the water temp when all things are running at your intended use - like gaming - and the rad/fan system is shedding all the heat it is capable of).


Ok, the temp monitor I use as basis is measuring the liquid temp on the out side of my top 360mm rad so we're on the same page there. 

1. When you say "before the loop steady state temp", how many degrees "before steady state temp" are you talking about?
2. Are you using all three data points in Q-fan, low/middle/high?
3. If I set the 2 x 140mm front intake fans (pushing through a front 280mm rad) and 3 x 120mm top exhaust fans (pushing through a top 360mm rad) to max during steady state temps, I will get negative pressure because exhaust > intake and I don't want that too happen. Is there any technical method I can follow to make sure that I maintain positive pressure (intake > exhaust) all throughout the fan-temp curve?

@All

Are there really no separate USB drivers for the ASUS Maximus X Code? I have both Intel USB3.0 and AsMedia USB3.1 controllers on this board and ASUS does not provide any USB drivers for any of them. I tried installing the AsMedia USB 3.1 drivers from station-drivers but the software doesn't recognize any compatible USB3.1 controllers on my system. The default Windows USB drivers are the ones currently installed and working fine. I'm just wondering if there's a more updated driver out there that I need to install into my system.


----------



## Robostyle

Why is this topic so dead? Barely 1 comment per day?


----------



## SpeedyIV

Robostyle said:


> Why is this topic so dead? Barely 1 comment per day?


Because everyone is busy reading i9-990K and Z390 leaks??


----------



## Robostyle

SpeedyIV said:


> Robostyle said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is this topic so dead? Barely 1 comment per day?
> 
> 
> 
> Because everyone is busy reading i9-990K and Z390 leaks??
Click to expand...

There’s something left you don’t already know?
All the leaks have been revealed week ago


----------



## wingman99

Robostyle said:


> Why is this topic so dead? Barely 1 comment per day?


We are waiting for the new coffee lake 8 core so we can move on from this old platform.:specool:


----------



## Robostyle

wingman99 said:


> We are waiting for the new coffee lake 8 core so we can move on from this old platform.:specool:


But technically this will be the "same" platform. Or u planning on buying z390?


----------



## SpeedyIV

Robostyle said:


> There’s something left you don’t already know?
> All the leaks have been revealed week ago


Well... I don't know what the final retail price is going to be (rumored to be ~US$450).
And I don't know how the VRMs on my Max H Hero Wifi Z370 MOBO are going to perform driving a CPU with 2 more cores.
And I don't know if Thunderbolt III Titan Ridge is actually going to work, unlike the TB3 card I got with my Asus X99 Deluxe II MOBO. That product is a disaster. There is a thread full of horror stories about trying to get an Asus Thunderbolt card working.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...tall-asus-thunderbolt-3-card-asus-x99-mb.html

But yeah - that's about it I think.


----------



## Robostyle

Beefier cooling, some tweaks and flaw detection - rather than that, I don't think they're gonna completely overhaul VRMs

Well, anyway, if someone could give me an advice regarding those questions I mentioned before - I would really appreciate it!


----------



## wingman99

Robostyle said:


> But technically this will be the "same" platform. Or u planning on buying z390?


My plan is to run the coffee lake 8 core on the outdated Z370 for a week then update to the Z390 to keep up to date.:specool: Then when Intel release the new processor after coffee lake I will get that to keep up to date.


----------



## Raghar

Does anyone know if Asus update Z270-WS to support 8-cores, or release Z390-WS for reasonable price (aka at worst similar to hero)?


----------



## ViTosS

So it's confirmed that Z370 will support 9th gen?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

ViTosS said:


> So it's confirmed that Z370 will support 9th gen?


[email protected]:






> Support list:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z370 BIOS VERSION
> ROG MAXIMUS X FORMULA 1602
> ROG MAXIMUS X CODE 1602
> ROG MAXIMUS X APEX 1602
> ROG MAXIMUS X HERO (WI-FI AC) 1602
> ROG MAXIMUS X HERO 1602
> ROG STRIX Z370-E GAMING 1002
> ROG STRIX Z370-F GAMING 1002
> ROG STRIX Z370-H GAMING 1602
> ROG STRIX Z370-G GAMING 1002
> ROG STRIX Z370-G GAMING (WI-FI AC) 1002
> PRIME Z370-A 1002
> TUF Z370-PRO GAMING 1602
> TUF Z370-PLUS GAMING 1002
> PRIME Z370-P 1002
> ROG STRIX Z370-I GAMING 1002
> 
> H370
> ROG STRIX H370-F GAMING 0802
> ROG STRIX H370-I GAMING 0803
> TUF H370-PRO GAMING (WI-FI) 0802
> TUF H370-PRO GAMING 0802
> PRIME H370-A 0802
> PRIME H370-PLUS 0802
> PRIME H370M-PLUS 0802
> 
> 
> B360
> ROG STRIX B360-H GAMING/OPTANE 0803
> ROG STRIX B360-H GAMING 0803
> ROG STRIX B360-F GAMING 0802
> ROG STRIX B360-G GAMING 0802
> ROG STRIX B360-I GAMING 0803
> TUF B360-PRO GAMING (WI-FI) 0802
> TUF B360-PRO GAMING 0802
> TUF B360-PLUS GAMING 0802
> TUF B360-PLUS GAMING S 0802
> TUF B360M-E GAMING 0803
> TUF B360M-PLUS GAMING 0803
> TUF B360M-PLUS GAMING S 0401
> PRIME B360-PLUS 0802
> PRIME B360M-A 0803
> PRIME B360M-C 0803
> PRIME B360M-D 0803
> PRIME B360M-K 0803
> EX-B360M-V 0803
> EX-B360M-V3 0803
> EX-B360M-V5 0803
> 
> H310
> TUF H310-PLUS GAMING 0803
> PRIME H310-PLUS 0803
> TUF H310M-PLUS GAMING 0803
> PRIME H310M-A 0803
> PRIME H310M-C 0803
> PRIME H310I-PLUS 0803
> PRIME H310M-E 0803
> PRIME H310M-K 0803
> PRIME H310M-D 0803
> PRIME H310M-AT 0803
> EX-H310M-X 0803
> EX-H310M-V3 0803
> 
> Q370
> PRIME Q370M-C 0803


*https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...9-Support-for-Maximus-X-amp-Strix-Z370-Boards*


----------



## Raghar

ViTosS said:


> So it's confirmed that Z370 will support 9th gen?





> ROG MAXIMUS X HERO BIOS 1602
> 1.Improve system performance.
> 2.Supports Intel next gen processor.
> 
> DOWNLOAD
> Version 1401
> 2018/06/158.31 MBytes
> ROG MAXIMUS X HERO BIOS 1401
> 01. Improved DRAM stability
> 02. Improve system performance.
> 03. Updated CPU microcode
> 04. Updated ME firmware


This hints there would be some support. If this means 8 core would be supported as well, for that we'd have to wait for actual i5-9600K release.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Raghar said:


> This hints there would be some support. If this means 8 core would be supported as well, for that we'd have to wait for actual i5-9600K release.



It's more than hint. Raja officialy said 9-series will be compatible with Z370


----------



## Jpmboy

No hints needed, the 9900K compatibility list is out and official.


----------



## KedarWolf

@Jpmboy

Is this pretty good? 4x8GB GSAT stable. And any suggestions on the timings?


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> @*Jpmboy*
> 
> Is this pretty good? 4x8GB GSAT stable. And any suggestions on the timings?
> 
> [\QUOTE]
> 
> 
> Pretty good? Looks daaum good to me with 32GB! what vsa and vccio?
> have you tried Faw to 20 and/or rtp to 6?


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> KedarWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> @*Jpmboy*
> 
> Is this pretty good? 4x8GB GSAT stable. And any suggestions on the timings?
> 
> [\QUOTE]
> 
> 
> Pretty good? Looks daaum good to me with 32GB! what vsa and vccio?
> have you tried Faw to 20 and/or rtp to 6?
Click to expand...


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> Jpmboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/hLDi3Qv.png
> 
> 
> 
> looks f-good to me.
Click to expand...


----------



## Robostyle

KedarWolf said:


> @Jpmboy
> 
> Is this pretty good? 4x8GB GSAT stable. And any suggestions on the timings?
> l


I don’t get it..... is it all depends on CPU? I mean, RAM overclock aswell? Cuz I can’t make my PC run even 4000 Mhz, whatever timings/voltage I set...


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> KedarWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> looks f-good to me.
> 
> 
> 
> Just got this GSAT and RamTest stable but I had to lower the cache from 50 to 49.
Click to expand...


----------



## kevindd992002

kevindd992002 said:


> Ok, the temp monitor I use as basis is measuring the liquid temp on the out side of my top 360mm rad so we're on the same page there.
> 
> 1. When you say "before the loop steady state temp", how many degrees "before steady state temp" are you talking about?
> 2. Are you using all three data points in Q-fan, low/middle/high?
> 3. If I set the 2 x 140mm front intake fans (pushing through a front 280mm rad) and 3 x 120mm top exhaust fans (pushing through a top 360mm rad) to max during steady state temps, I will get negative pressure because exhaust > intake and I don't want that too happen. Is there any technical method I can follow to make sure that I maintain positive pressure (intake > exhaust) all throughout the fan-temp curve?
> 
> @All
> 
> Are there really no separate USB drivers for the ASUS Maximus X Code? I have both Intel USB3.0 and AsMedia USB3.1 controllers on this board and ASUS does not provide any USB drivers for any of them. I tried installing the AsMedia USB 3.1 drivers from station-drivers but the software doesn't recognize any compatible USB3.1 controllers on my system. The default Windows USB drivers are the ones currently installed and working fine. I'm just wondering if there's a more updated driver out there that I need to install into my system.


 @Jpmboy

In case you've missed my post?


----------



## Robostyle

So, I've tested my sytem in more IRL-related scenarios, regarding those voltage spikes I was talking about earlier,

And, no, @Jpmboy , You were wrong. These spikes go with amperage spike, more than often - whith adaptive voltaage set to ~1.36V mark, it easily goes up to 1.4V with currents above 100A.
And it DOES somehow related to AVX workload, because offseting was the only way for me to get rid of spikes, thus getting the desired voltage.

Any other possible factors were excluded, i.e. LLC, XMP, etc.


----------



## Praz

Robostyle said:


> So, I've tested my sytem in more IRL-related scenarios, regarding those voltage spikes I was talking about earlier,
> 
> And, no, @Jpmboy , You were wrong. These spikes go with amperage spike, more than often - whith adaptive voltaage set to ~1.36V mark, it easily goes up to 1.4V with currents above 100A.
> And it DOES somehow related to AVX workload, because offseting was the only way for me to get rid of spikes, thus getting the desired voltage.
> 
> Any other possible factors were excluded, i.e. LLC, XMP, etc.


Hello

Actually in the context @Jpmboy was mentioning he is correct. Such things such as overshoot or how current lags voltage cannot be seen or monitored with software so it is understandable how you can reach this erroneous conclusion. It has also been previously stated that when using Adaptive Mode we are only applying an additional voltage on top of Intels preprogrammed values. While there are some settings in the BIOS that help shift certain aspects of Intel's programming the base function is still as dictated by Intel.


----------



## wingman99

Praz said:


> Hello
> 
> Actually in the context @Jpmboy was mentioning he is correct. Such things such as overshoot or how current lags voltage cannot be seen or monitored with software so it is understandable how you can reach this erroneous conclusion. It has also been previously stated that when using Adaptive Mode we are only applying an additional voltage on top of Intels preprogrammed values. While there are some settings in the BIOS that help shift certain aspects of Intel's programming the base function is still as dictated by Intel.


How true that is what SVID/DVID does when running default BIOS settings. All we are doing is engaging a offset to the base settings like you said. Intel's processor dynamic core voltage is high tech electronics from the start of 2011.


----------



## Robostyle

Ok, so the last thing I wanted to get, for so long - what is it? What's that spike is about, that I can see even with multimeter? 

Even SVID values differ at the same time - for my CPU (as an example), one cores have 1.275 SVID, another 1.310, at the same time.


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> @*Jpmboy*
> 
> In case you've missed my post?


1. I like to have the fans spin up when the hot side of the loop is in the 32C range (+7 ambient). It's a preference... but the main thing is that the fans are running at the highest speed (or best speed which can be noise and pressure) when the loop is at the balance you want to set.
2. I use 3, with isle state set to have the rad fans stop. They come on at 27C. And ramp pretty fast from there as the loop gets hot.
3. Frankly, I would have set it up so all fans are blowing fresh air (room air) thru the rads. your top 360 is exhausting hot air from the case coming from the 240 rad and the board/components. The down side of what I did is that the vrm and other on-board heat sinks are only cooled by warm rad air. Lol - compromises. 




Robostyle said:


> Ok, *so the last thing I wanted to get, for so long - what is it*? What's that spike is about, that I can see even with multimeter?
> 
> Even SVID values differ at the same time - for my CPU (as an example), one cores have 1.275 SVID, another 1.310, at the same time.


It is the power section delivering the voltage requested by the CPU. That's what dynamic voltage and frequency do. Adaptive can only add voltage to the VID when it hits turbo multipliers (this is why you cannot use adaptive with BCLK at 200... tho "Adaptive BCLK Voltage" may handle it in some recent platforms and bioses).

Right. so as you point out, with the vid and adaptive vcore you want to tame with offset. Trying to compensate for this with offset can work, but can also be a bit quixotic. Why not just run manual override will all c-states enabled and speedshift (not speed step with win10). \
Again, if your overclocked CPU is stable at a manual vcore lower than you can manage using any SVID-based method (a somewhat less rare, but known issue - ie, the 8086 seems to have this "problem") just use manual vcore. idle wattage once c-states kick in is a few watts higher than adaptive idle with c-states. Again, the "spikes" in vcore you are seeing are not V_ovs spikes. The overvoltage you measure with a DMM is based on your bios settings. All cores can have different VID values, since each is programmed separately. You should see what the list of VIDs look like on an 18 core. 
We're operating these chips outside their specs, don;t be surprised if the VID spec is giving you headaches with VID-based voltage control.


----------



## Jpmboy

Praz said:


> Hello



Good to see you stop by.


----------



## Robostyle

Well, I though that running manually above 1.4V would be a little harsh for long term reliability, or could cause a degradation, but then - I don't know really. Judging from what Intel have in their datasheet regarding to Coffee Lake-S, any voltage up to 1.52V is completely fine, as long as current is below 130A. So, I'm a little confused between what I've knew about OC and degradation before, and what I see reading those datasheets.

For an instance, if I have superior custom loop or chiller, and I can handle CPU temps below 69C even at 1.5V + my usual CPU utilization rarely goes beyond 100A mark - does it mean CPU's potential will last for ~10 years? And it won't suffer even from transitional damage? 

As for "avx voltage offset" I've told You about - the only reason I've suggested there was some kind of it, only because I've interrupted the "adaptive voltage" to go crazy only after I've set AVX offset to -1 (or more). 
Thus, I thought that there's might be some kind of voltage compensation or correction based on AVX - so, with equal AVX and non-AVX ratio, CPU automatically applies higher voltage, in defiance of what You set in UEFI, because, as You guys mentioned before, "Intel wants it that way"


----------



## wingman99

Robostyle said:


> Well, I though that running manually above 1.4V would be a little harsh for long term reliability, or could cause a degradation, but then - I don't know really. Judging from what Intel have in their datasheet regarding to Coffee Lake-S, any voltage up to 1.52V is completely fine, as long as current is below 130A. So, I'm a little confused between what I've knew about OC and degradation before, and what I see reading those datasheets.
> 
> For an instance, if I have superior custom loop or chiller, and I can handle CPU temps below 69C even at 1.5V + my usual CPU utilization rarely goes beyond 100A mark - does it mean CPU's potential will last for ~10 years? And it won't suffer even from transitional damage?
> 
> As for "avx voltage offset" I've told You about - the only reason I've suggested there was some kind of it, only because I've interrupted the "adaptive voltage" to go crazy only after I've set AVX offset to -1 (or more).
> Thus, I thought that there's might be some kind of voltage compensation or correction based on AVX - so, with equal AVX and non-AVX ratio, CPU automatically applies higher voltage, in defiance of what You set in UEFI, because, as You guys mentioned before, "Intel wants it that way"


How are you measuring AMP's? 1.52v X 138AMPs = 209.76 watts.


----------



## Robostyle

wingman99 said:


> How are you measuring AMP's? 1.52v X 138AMPs = 209.76 watts.


I can see amperage only from software atm, didn't tried ti measure it with dmm


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Well, I though that running manually above 1.4V would be a little harsh for long term reliability, or could cause a degradation, but then - I don't know really. Judging from what Intel have in their datasheet regarding to Coffee Lake-S, any voltage up to 1.52V is completely fine, as long as current is below 130A. So, I'm a little confused between what I've knew about OC and degradation before, and what I see reading those datasheets.
> 
> For an instance, if I have superior custom loop or chiller, and I can handle CPU temps below 69C even at 1.5V + my usual CPU utilization rarely goes beyond 100A mark - does it mean CPU's potential will last for ~10 years? And it won't suffer even from transitional damage?
> 
> As for "avx voltage offset" I've told You about - the only reason I've suggested there was some kind of it, only because I've interrupted the "adaptive voltage" to go crazy only after I've set AVX offset to -1 (or more).
> Thus, I thought that there's might be some kind of voltage compensation or correction based on AVX - *so, with equal AVX and non-AVX ratio, CPU automatically applies higher voltage, *in defiance of what You set in UEFI, because, as You guys mentioned before, "Intel wants it that way"


I've not been able to replicate that... with manual vcore the system actually droops MORE under heavy AVX load than a lighter load or implementation of AVX (eg, y-cruncher vs x264). With adaptive my 8086K will run a higher vcore than necessary (my 8700K will not and is good on adaptive up to 5400MHz). If it does otherwise, either the LLC, VID or loadlines are messin with ya. When you say it is adding voltage under AVX, what LLC is set? (and load lines IF you are using an early bios).

Just a reminder that the Intel Spec sheet (Product spec) tables listing maximum voltages and currents are specs that really cannot be used in isolation... The Vcore limited needs to be considered in the context of the other parameters listed (current, temperature etc) as you know. Amperage and voltage needs to be combined (to watts, TDP). The system may have a very high AMP reading at lower voltage and frequency. Frankly no matter what "superior" liquid cooling you have if that chip routinely runs for your use, at 2x TDP on a daily basis, you need to reconsider your overclock or uses. 

Regarding your question about "damage".... who knows, and, you are overclocking, there is risk. Period.


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> I can see amperage only from software atm, didn't tried ti measure it with dmm


 here's some examples with data. (screenshot while each is running), VID changes with load (and frequency even for AVX offset)

RB x264, AVX
AID64 CPu only - non-AVX, SSE2 i believe
IBT, AVX (linX)
y-cruncher AVX (up to AVX512 is available to the CPU)


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> I've not been able to replicate that... with manual vcore the system actually droops MORE under heavy AVX load than a lighter load or implementation of AVX (eg, y-cruncher vs x264). With adaptive my 8086K will run a higher vcore than necessary (my 8700K will not and is good on adaptive up to 5400MHz). If it does otherwise, either the LLC, VID or loadlines are messin with ya. When you say it is adding voltage under AVX, what LLC is set? (and load lines IF you are using an early bios).
> 
> Just a reminder that the Intel Spec sheet (Product spec) tables listing maximum voltages and currents are specs that really cannot be used in isolation... The Vcore limited needs to be considered in the context of the other parameters listed (current, temperature etc) as you know. Amperage and voltage needs to be combined (to watts, TDP). The system may have a very high AMP reading at lower voltage and frequency. Frankly no matter what "superior" liquid cooling you have if that chip routinely runs for your use, at 2x TDP on a daily basis, you need to reconsider your overclock or uses.


Yeah, You couldn't replicate it with benchmarks, etc. Only when you turn the stresstest off, maybe. I see this overshoot in mediocre load tasks, without constant 100% CPU load. Especially that comes in CPU-heavy games, like BF series. 
On daily basis, I use LLC is 5, bios is the latest, loadlines set to 0.01. 
And, no, LLC level have nothing to do with this overshoot, checked all over. I used lower core ratio (48) and vCore (1.3V) for granularity. Then, I've tried every LLC with manual voltage, in order to figure what overshoot each of LLC does. Afterwards, I've tried adaptive 1.3V with and without AVX offset, implementing the higher LLC, step by step. So I was able to clearly figure out, wether it was LLC overshoot or not. 

In any case, no matter what LLC I was using, without AVX -1 offset, I'v always got this overshoot. With 1.3 set in UEFI, I've got up to 1.334(1.328-1.34V), 1.36 gave me up to 1.408V. 
Using AVX offset -1 helps to get rid of them - at least, in my case. 
And, to be honest, I can't distinguish these overshoot as "rapid". It can sustain "overshoot" voltage for 5-10 sec, maybe even longer. Moreover, they occur under steady load.

Foa an instance, try setting the adaptive voltage (the lowest stable for desired clock, or near it) on all of your coffee lake systems, without AVX offset, LLC5-6, other settings seem like have no effect. Boot up and use your PC for daily work+surf+gaming (If You do), for an 1-2 hour - don't bench. And launch HWInfo to gather the overall statistics. And just tell, if You have any overshoot over what You've set.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Jpmboy said:


> Again, if your overclocked CPU is stable at a manual vcore lower than you can manage using any SVID-based method (a somewhat less rare, but known issue - ie, the 8086 seems to have this "problem") just use manual vcore.





Jpmboy said:


> With adaptive my 8086K will run a higher vcore than necessary (my 8700K will not and is good on adaptive up to 5400MHz). If it does otherwise, either the LLC, VID or loadlines are messin with ya.





Robostyle said:


> And, to be honest, I can't distinguish these overshoot as "rapid". It can sustain "overshoot" voltage for 5-10 sec, maybe even longer. Moreover, they occur under steady load.


Don't meat to butt in here but I have been following this conversation because I went through a similar "battle" with Adaptive vs Manual with my 8700K on a Max X Hero Wifi. I was also seeing spikes with Adaptive, and after reading up, I was under the impression that while annoying, they were basically harmless because they were short duration and there was no current behind them (which you can't see, at least easily), due to current not necessarily being in phase with voltage at that moment in time. You have to think in terms of the power being dissipated during the spike while considering if this is detrimental to the health of the CPU. But if Robostyle is seeing these high voltage levels for 5 to 10 seconds (or longer), I would not call that a spike.

I ended up in Manual with C-States and Speed Shift enabled and have been fine at 4.8GHz. I did take it up to 5.0 just to say I did it but the VCore and temps were a little high for my comfort zone. I am running non-delidded with a Corsair H110i 280mm cooler, so 4.8Ghz is reasonable for this setup. If I de-lid the chip and maybe beef up the cooling, then I would go for a 24/7 5GHz+ overclock. That said, I do not recall sustained excess Vcore for 5 to 10 seconds. Maybe I need to go back and look at it with normal loads of some Chrome tabs open with email and Office apps running.

I do understand that sometimes someone will get a chip that can run stable at a frequency with less voltage than the VID, and since Adaptive can only add to the VID, then in this case Manual with C-States and Speed Shift is preferred. What I don't understand is how these CPUs end up "this way". If Intel sets the VID tables for each individual CPU, then are these chips examples of an Intel screw up? Should't they have realized that particular piece of silicon is capable of running a a lower voltage and set the VID accordingly?


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Yeah, You couldn't replicate it with benchmarks, etc. Only when you turn the stresstest off, maybe. I see this overshoot in mediocre load tasks, without constant 100% CPU load. Especially that comes in CPU-heavy games, like BF series.
> On daily basis, I use LLC is 5, bios is the latest, loadlines set to 0.01.
> And, no, LLC level have nothing to do with this overshoot, checked all over. I used lower core ratio (48) and vCore (1.3V) for granularity. Then, I've tried every LLC with manual voltage, in order to figure what overshoot each of LLC does. Afterwards, I've tried adaptive 1.3V with and without AVX offset, implementing the higher LLC, step by step. So I was able to clearly figure out, wether it was LLC overshoot or not.
> 
> In any case, no matter what LLC I was using, without AVX -1 offset, I'v always got this overshoot. With 1.3 set in UEFI, I've got up to 1.334(1.328-1.34V), 1.36 gave me up to 1.408V.
> Using AVX offset -1 helps to get rid of them - at least, in my case.
> And, to be honest, I can't distinguish these overshoot as "rapid". It can sustain "overshoot" voltage for 5-10 sec, maybe even longer. Moreover, they occur under steady load.
> 
> Foa an instance, *try setting the adaptive voltage (the lowest stable for desired clock, or near it) on all of your coffee lake systems, without AVX offset, LLC5-6, other settings seem like have no effect.* Boot up and use your PC for daily work+surf+gaming (If You do), for an 1-2 hour - don't bench. And launch HWInfo to gather the overall statistics. And just tell, if You have any overshoot over what You've set.


No need to. I already have done this and posted the effect with my 8086K (several times now) - same as you see. This is why I'm using manual override with that CPU - as I show in the pics above. AND I do a lot more than bench. Your question has been asked and answered.

I'm not trying to prove anything. i think we're done here.


----------



## wingman99

SpeedyIV said:


> Don't meat to butt in here but I have been following this conversation because I went through a similar "battle" with Adaptive vs Manual with my 8700K on a Max X Hero Wifi. I was also seeing spikes with Adaptive, and after reading up, I was under the impression that while annoying, they were basically harmless because they were short duration and there was no current behind them (which you can't see, at least easily), due to current not necessarily being in phase with voltage at that moment in time. You have to think in terms of the power being dissipated during the spike while considering if this is detrimental to the health of the CPU. But if Robostyle is seeing these high voltage levels for 5 to 10 seconds (or longer), I would not call that a spike.
> 
> I ended up in Manual with C-States and Speed Shift enabled and have been fine at 4.8GHz. I did take it up to 5.0 just to say I did it but the VCore and temps were a little high for my comfort zone. I am running non-delidded with a Corsair H110i 280mm cooler, so 4.8Ghz is reasonable for this setup. If I de-lid the chip and maybe beef up the cooling, then I would go for a 24/7 5GHz+ overclock. That said, I do not recall sustained excess Vcore for 5 to 10 seconds. Maybe I need to go back and look at it with normal loads of some Chrome tabs open with email and Office apps running.
> 
> I do understand that sometimes someone will get a chip that can run stable at a frequency with less voltage than the VID, and since Adaptive can only add to the VID, then in this case Manual with C-States and Speed Shift is preferred. What I don't understand is how these CPUs end up "this way". If Intel sets the VID tables for each individual CPU, then are these chips examples of an Intel screw up? Should't they have realized that particular piece of silicon is capable of running a a lower voltage and set the VID accordingly?


Engineers sets stock dvice voltage with specification tolerance using mathematics and testing instruments so trillions of processors work perfect with any application. They don't sit around testing the voltage on each processor with stress tests. Can you imagine getting in your car or using any digital device like a phone and the engineers did not set the electronics voltage correctly.

Also when you test stability do you use Intel linpack? Link: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-linpack-benchmark-download-license-agreement


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> No need to. I already have done this and posted the effect with my 8086K (several times now) - same as you see. This is why I'm using manual override with that CPU - as I show in the pics above. AND I do a lot more than bench. Your question has been asked and answered.
> 
> I'm not trying to prove anything. i think we're done here.


So any idea what is it about? 

P.S. You can still use adaptive, just figure out what offset levels that overshoot to the ground.


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> So any idea what is it about?
> 
> P.S. *You can still use adaptive, just figure out what offset levels that overshoot to the ground*.



wut?? (you really do not think that is news to me, right?) :tiredsmil
anyway - is does not take a day of use to see the vcore match VID as shown in the pictures below (includes brief gaming session - crysis 3). All bios settings are in the txt file. Read, study.. and you'll get it.
Let's not perseverate to this same already answered issue further.


----------



## Jpmboy

Anyone interested in quick reading on C and P states: https://www.thomas-krenn.com/en/wiki/Processor_P-states_and_C-states


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> Anyone interested in quick reading on C and P states: https://www.thomas-krenn.com/en/wiki/Processor_P-states_and_C-states


Manual instead of Adaptive, C-States enabled or Auto, SpeedShift and SpeedStep enabled or Auto, vcore stays at max.

Adaptive, C-States enabled, SpeedShift and SpeedStep enabled, vcore responds and lowers quickly.

Adaptive, C-states and Speed Shift disabled, Speed Step enabled (My prefered, I think it helps me overclock in a more stable state) vcore lowers, but responds slowly and doesn't lower right away.

How do you get your vcore to lower on Manual with Speed Shift?


----------



## encrypted11

Jpmboy said:


> Anyone interested in quick reading on C and P states: https://www.thomas-krenn.com/en/wiki/Processor_P-states_and_C-states


The matrix originates from page 70 of the 8th Generation Intel® Core™ Processor Datasheet, Vol. 1 :specool:
https://www.intel.com/content/dam/w...heets/8th-gen-core-family-datasheet-vol-1.pdf

There are also some mentions on the datasheet that implies DVFS/low power states (while deemed immaterial by most people for 24/7 manual vcore overclocks) is beneficial for long term reliability of the silicon.


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> Manual instead of Adaptive, C-States enabled or Auto, SpeedShift and SpeedStep enabled or Auto, vcore stays at max.
> 
> Adaptive, C-States enabled, SpeedShift and SpeedStep enabled, vcore responds and lowers quickly.
> 
> Adaptive, C-states and Speed Shift disabled, Speed Step enabled (My prefered, I think it helps me overclock in a more stable state) vcore lowers, but responds slowly and doesn't lower right away.
> 
> How do you get your vcore to lower on Manual with Speed Shift?


It lowers on a per core basis and you will not see it in OS tools. You can see the C7 residency time in HWi... which indicates the core power is lowered. When adaptive lowers vcore, you will see an increase in amps at idle, vs low amps but constant voltage at idle in manual override. C-states lower package power, not vcore to all cores - the action of monitoring it from the OS keeps one core in a P-state just to do that - any wake core gets the manual override voltage regardless of P-state . You are right, full dynamic/adaptive is best (with all c-states enabled), if your cpu works best that way. My 8700K(ES) is very happy with adaptive at 5.2/4.8 with 1.35-ish volts, no overvoltage measured by DMM. This 8086K on the other hand, will pop the vcore to the VID - well above what is needed for even linX and y-cruncher stability tests. But runs 5.2/5.0 at 1.285V and enver gets above 60C even in y-cruncher at >150W pull!

In both cases, I've been using shift and not step, no stability differences I've noticed, yet. I'm just going with the new tech, for no reason 'cept it's new.


----------



## Praz

Jpmboy said:


> Good to see you stop by.


Hello

Not much going on to post about. Most of what I see is just a rehash of things that have been asked and answered countless times already. I don't remember a time when hardware has been at such a standstill.


----------



## swddeluxx

Jpmboy said:


> Anyone interested in quick reading on C and P states: https://www.thomas-krenn.com/en/wiki/Processor_P-states_and_C-states


Very interesting Jpmboy :thumb:


----------



## Robostyle

No
maybe there is some misunderstanding.... I was just asking if You or anybody else would knew, why these spikes are dependant on AVX offset - I didnt found any answer for that...


----------



## wingman99

KedarWolf said:


> Manual instead of Adaptive, C-States enabled or Auto, SpeedShift and SpeedStep enabled or Auto, vcore stays at max.
> 
> Adaptive, C-States enabled, SpeedShift and SpeedStep enabled, vcore responds and lowers quickly.
> 
> Adaptive, C-states and Speed Shift disabled, Speed Step enabled (My prefered, I think it helps me overclock in a more stable state) vcore lowers, but responds slowly and doesn't lower right away.
> 
> How do you get your vcore to lower on Manual with Speed Shift?


With C-states or EIST enabled the voltage per core is only reduced when idle (halt on data first), so C-states does not effect overclocking, just performance data start time from idle. Some of the data start steps are raise the voltage start the core clock then allow the data to execute. With manual instead of Adaptive, all C-State setting and EIST voltage reduction settings are bypassed because the voltage is fixed from the VRM.


----------



## CharliePL

hi, I would like to buy Z370 taichi. Would I run into any problems running the following set:

8086k CPU
Crucial MX500 1TB SATA III SSD
G SKILL F4-3000C16D-16GTZR RAM
Corsair 570x case

Is RGB going to work as well?


----------



## Jpmboy

might need to ask that question in the AsRock z370 thread.


----------



## CharliePL

Jpmboy said:


> might need to ask that question in the AsRock z370 thread.


My bad  I didn't know how to delete my post, sorry.


----------



## Jpmboy

CharliePL said:


> My bad  I didn't know how to delete my post, sorry.


no worries, you just would get a more informed answer there


----------



## feznz

Just wondering if any one has had problems with blue screens I cannot work out about to try uninstall KB4456655 just running out of ideas here even stock settings are not real bench stable


----------



## Jpmboy

blue screens after what changes to the OS, bios or anything else? And what error code?


----------



## feznz

Jpmboy said:


> blue screens after what changes to the OS, bios or anything else? And what error code?



A bit of a long story just moved house I believe the first BSOD was before I moved the PC but really cant remember exactly as it has been a full on few weeks massive job for us to move so just left it until I had time to look at it.


but first BSOD happened after the KB4456655 update which will not allow to uninstall or system restore to remove update to eleminate that possibility.

ran memtest 4 runs 0 errors

I thought it a bit strange but when setting up the PC somhow the CLMOS button must have been pressed and I didn't save the OC profile Doh.

just have to try just really wanted to know if anyone having problems after that KB4456655 update it is to do with Specture security.

Yes a hard one as it is from scratch dianostic approach will try to captutre the next BSOD code


----------



## wingman99

feznz said:


> A bit of a long story just moved house I believe the first BSOD was before I moved the PC but really cant remember exactly as it has been a full on few weeks massive job for us to move so just left it until I had time to look at it.
> 
> 
> but first BSOD happened after the KB4456655 update which will not allow to uninstall or system restore to remove update to eleminate that possibility.
> 
> ran memtest 4 runs 0 errors
> 
> I thought it a bit strange but when setting up the PC somhow the CLMOS button must have been pressed and I didn't save the OC profile Doh.
> 
> just have to try just really wanted to know if anyone having problems after that KB4456655 update it is to do with Specture security.
> 
> Yes a hard one as it is from scratch dianostic approach will try to captutre the next BSOD code


I have not had a problem with KB4456655 update and I use my PC all the time and it runs 24/7.


----------



## feznz

wingman99 said:


> I have not had a problem with KB4456655 update and I use my PC all the time and it runs 24/7.



Thanks for that it was listed as having a few known issues but none for BSOD

edit;
Getting somewhere not sure why but different programs report different voltages like 0.2v difference


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> Thanks for that it was listed as having a few known issues but none for BSOD
> 
> edit;
> Getting somewhere not sure why but different programs report different voltages like 0.2v difference



you are looking at VID in HWi and vcore in cpuZ. Both have a 16mV "resolution".


----------



## Robostyle

*Jpmboy*
VID has 0.001 step


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> *Jpmboy*
> VID has 0.001 step



er.. the SIO report to the OS is 8 bit. So, Vcore read by cpuZ is in 16mV increments, so the "resolution" is 16mV. And the VID is indeed seen in a 1mV number, a value no bios can _actually _tune to.


----------



## xkm1948

Howdy the fine folks of ASUS Z370 owners thread. Would you guys recommend the Z370 Strix ITX over AsRock's Fatality? Really torn between those 2 options.


----------



## ThrashZone

xkm1948 said:


> Howdy the fine folks of ASUS Z370 owners thread. Would you guys recommend the Z370 Strix ITX over AsRock's Fatality? Really torn between those 2 options.


Hi,
Not a z370 owner but would never get a strikes line 
Hero/ code.. :thumb:


----------



## xkm1948

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Not a z370 owner but would never get a strikes line
> Hero/ code.. :thumb:


There is no Z370ITX from ASUS that is hero/code


----------



## feznz

Jpmboy said:


> you are looking at VID in HWi and vcore in cpuZ. Both have a 16mV "resolution".



Back to normal VID and Vcore reading near same not sure what happened but since that KB4456655 Windows update I need 1.37v to be stable it used to be 1.35v not 100% sure it could have been degrading of CPU and a coincidence that the first BSOD happened on the same day of the update.

CLMOS the bios shifting the PC didn't help either.


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> Back to normal VID and Vcore reading near same not sure what happened but since that KB4456655 Windows update I need 1.37v to be stable it used to be 1.35v not 100% sure it could have been degrading of CPU and a coincidence that the first BSOD happened on the same day of the update.
> 
> CLMOS the bios shifting the PC didn't help either.



At least yours are "near same". This 8086K has a vid much higher than the needed vcore. I can plug an 8700K in, load the same bios settings and viola, vid is ~ vcore and adaptive is straight forward. I'm NOT complaining about the 8086K, it does run 5.2/5.0 at 1.285V realbench and y-cruncher stable (avx-2) but while the vid reading is 1.4+ volts! Hence, manual override :no-smile


----------



## saipan

Just got my new Z370-a this weekend. install went pretty good, took a few power up and down to get all working. very stable now. next step is a new gpu ( evga 1060?)


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> At least yours are "near same". This 8086K has a vid much higher than the needed vcore. I can plug an 8700K in, load the same bios settings and viola, vid is ~ vcore and adaptive is straight forward. I'm NOT complaining about the 8086K, it does run 5.2/5.0 at 1.285V realbench and y-cruncher stable (avx-2) but while the vid reading is 1.4+ volts! Hence, manual override :no-smile


I'm confused, my VID is way higher too on my 8700k but isn't it in HWInfo the Vcore voltage that the CPU is actually running at, not the VID?


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> I'm confused, my VID is way higher too on my 8700k but isn't it in HWInfo the Vcore voltage that the CPU is actually running at, not the VID?


yes. VID can be much higher than the necessary vcore. VID is the request, vcore is the "delivered".


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> I'm confused, my VID is way higher too on my 8700k but isn't it in HWInfo the Vcore voltage that the CPU is actually running at, not the VID?





Jpmboy said:


> yes. VID can be much higher than the necessary vcore. VID is the request, vcore is the "delivered".


I think what Kedar is asking is if HWINFO displays VID or VCore, not if VID can be higher than (required) VCore. To that, AFAIK, HWINFO displays VID for each core in the CPU Section (Identified as Core #x VID) but displays VCore via the MOBO Nuvoton NCT6973D Super I/O Chip section. A VID is reported for each core, but there is only 1 VCore reported. Is this not correct?


----------



## joeh4384

xkm1948 said:


> Howdy the fine folks of ASUS Z370 owners thread. Would you guys recommend the Z370 Strix ITX over AsRock's Fatality? Really torn between those 2 options.


I like my 370I. I think the AS-rock board has better VRMs. I am using the 370I because it has 2 m2 slots.


----------



## Jpmboy

SpeedyIV said:


> I think what Kedar is asking is if HWINFO displays VID or VCore, not if VID can be higher than (required) VCore. To that, AFAIK, HWINFO displays VID for each core in the CPU Section (Identified as Core #x VID) but displays VCore via the MOBO Nuvoton NCT6973D Super I/O Chip section. *A VID is reported for each core, but there is only 1 VCore reported. Is this not correct?*


yes, absolutely correct. however, the on-die step down will provide the core-based vid request to each core... with everything set to VID-based. Manual override (SVID is disabled on auto, or set to disabled) will deliver the same vcore to each core regardless of the VID request.


----------



## Robostyle

So, after a month! of intel's rather useless responses for my inquiry, I still don't know, why, at least in my case, adaptive vcore becomes stable when AVX offset applied. So, could someone give me a hint regarding that?


----------



## ArneR

I've tried to explain this for you several times, last try:

When using adaptive vcore or offset; anything relying on the SVID: the cpu requests vcore based on what Intel preprogrammed into your spesific sample at any given multiplier. And there are two separate VID tables, one for normal use, and one for AVX loads which will be somewhat higher than your default VID. How much additional VID is set on a per cpu basis, and some has more, and some less. That is why you are seeing a "spike" as you like to call it from time to time. Even Windows and internet browsers use the instruction set sporadically, so VID and consequentally vcore will be somewhat higher in those circumstances. This is perfectly normal, and not at all dependent on load. The only thing that has an impact on the AVX VID table is if you are using an AVX multilplier offset, and with your setting of -1 you noticed a similar reduction in additional vcore (e.g. spikes) as my particular sample (30mv) for an additional 10mv over specified vcore in bios when under any kind of AVX load.

My cpu for an example: Set vcore to adaptive, 1,365v at 5100MHz, avx offset of -1, LLC 5.
VID reads 1,370v normally, with a max of 1,380v, this is easily verified running prime95 with and without AVX enabled. Without an AVX offset of -1, my VID reads 1,410 during AVX, an additional 40mv as previously stated. 

Do you now see the connection? 

You're looking at a predefined feature as if it was a problem; something wrong, but there really isn't. Ideally we would have two separate vcore fields in bios, to override this feature if we have better silicon quality than Intel deemed it to be, but alas, we must make due with what we got.


----------



## Jpmboy

ArneR said:


> I've tried to explain this for you several times, last try:
> 
> When using adaptive vcore or offset; anything relying on the SVID: the cpu requests vcore based on what Intel preprogrammed into your spesific sample at any given multiplier. And there are two separate VID tables, one for normal use, and one for AVX loads which will be somewhat higher than your default VID. How much additional VID is set on a per cpu basis, and some has more, and some less. That is why you are seeing a "spike" as you like to call it from time to time. Even Windows and internet browsers use the instruction set sporadically, so VID and consequentally vcore will be somewhat higher in those circumstances. This is perfectly normal, and not at all dependent on load. The only thing that has an impact on the AVX VID table is if you are using an AVX multilplier offset, and with your setting of -1 you noticed a similar reduction in additional vcore (e.g. spikes) as my particular sample (30mv) for an additional 10mv over specified vcore in bios when under any kind of AVX load.
> 
> My cpu for an example: Set vcore to adaptive, 1,365v at 5100MHz, avx offset of -1, LLC 5.
> VID reads 1,370v normally, with a max of 1,380v, this is easily verified running prime95 with and without AVX enabled. Without an AVX offset of -1, my VID reads 1,410 during AVX, an additional 40mv as previously stated.
> 
> Do you now see the connection?
> 
> You're looking at a predefined feature as if it was a problem; something wrong, but there really isn't.* Ideally we would have two separate vcore fields in bios,* to override this feature if we have better silicon quality than Intel deemed it to be, but alas, we must make due with what we got.


^^ THIS! (+1 if I could)


----------



## feznz

I see there is a whole pile of drivers released for the Apex on the 28/10/2018


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> ^^ THIS! (+1 if I could)


And you’ve told hundred of times “theres no offseting features related to AVX”.......
Well, if you do not like the word “offset”, you might have been corrected me. But yeah, its easier telling “hey newbie, relax, don’t bother sorting that out or your head’ll blow off”


----------



## Robostyle

Del


----------



## Robostyle

ArneR said:


> I've tried to explain this for you several times, last try:
> 
> When using adaptive vcore or offset; anything relying on the SVID: the cpu requests vcore based on what Intel preprogrammed into your spesific sample at any given multiplier. And there are two separate VID tables, one for normal use, and one for AVX loads which will be somewhat higher than your default VID. How much additional VID is set on a per cpu basis, and some has more, and some less. That is why you are seeing a "spike" as you like to call it from time to time. Even Windows and internet browsers use the instruction set sporadically, so VID and consequentally vcore will be somewhat higher in those circumstances. This is perfectly normal, and not at all dependent on load. The only thing that has an impact on the AVX VID table is if you are using an AVX multilplier offset, and with your setting of -1 you noticed a similar reduction in additional vcore (e.g. spikes) as my particular sample (30mv) for an additional 10mv over specified vcore in bios when under any kind of AVX load.
> 
> My cpu for an example: Set vcore to adaptive, 1,365v at 5100MHz, avx offset of -1, LLC 5.
> VID reads 1,370v normally, with a max of 1,380v, this is easily verified running prime95 with and without AVX enabled. Without an AVX offset of -1, my VID reads 1,410 during AVX, an additional 40mv as previously stated.
> 
> Do you now see the connection?
> 
> You're looking at a predefined feature as if it was a problem; something wrong, but there really isn't. Ideally we would have two separate vcore fields in bios, to override this feature if we have better silicon quality than Intel deemed it to be, but alas, we must make due with what we got.


No, I’m not.
Well, you wrote that once, but yeah, I’ve remembered something like this mentioned before. Maybe locals brainwashed me that there’s no avx-voltage relativity at all

And its harder to doublecheck it since intel’s completely ******ed support

P.S But where did you found that info anyway?


----------



## ArneR

No you're not what? Be more specific please as to what in my statement you don't agree with.
I can't recall exactly how many times in this thread I mentioned these functions, but that doesn't really matter.

It's really not hard at all, all you need is two separate folders with prime95. In one you edit the local.txt file to disable avx instructions, and the other you disable fma3 instructions, this last one will then use the instruction set beneath that, which is AVX. 

Then you do what I said earlier in the thread: Boot into bios, and set LLC to lvl6, multiplier to 47x and set adaptive vcore to AUTO. Leave AVX offset at 0 for now. Your cpu will now take care of vcore all on it's own and the LLC setting of 6 ensures adequate vcore for stability, even during p95 small fft.
Now boot into windows, and start up hwinfo64 and the non-avx version of prime95. Run whatever test, it doesn't matter. Now take note of what value you see in the fields VID. It will be 0.001v lower than normal because it is under load, just round up. After this you stop all workers and exit that instance of p95, and open the other with avx support enabled. Your VID under load will now be somewhat higher, and this is normal. Again take note of the current VID value.

Next you will go back into bios, and only set an AVX offset of -1. No other changes. Repeat the AVX p95 test, and take note of your now lower VID. If you want to you can repeat the test with even greater avx offsets, but as far as I can remember you start to see diminishing returns, e.g. VID don't lower much after -2.

You should now be able to see the correlation of VID/vcore requests I've been trying to convey to you. These numbers are set in stone by Intel, and stays that way no matter what multiplier you set in the end, re: my example above. Meaning if you set your overclock to 5000MHz with a vcore of 1,35v with LLC6 and no avx offset you will see vcore going over 1,35v by approx. the same amount as you determined during my test. With an avx offset of -1 you should see vcore overshooting by a lesser amount, per your results in the second test.

I've come to this info by being systematic in my testing, and from testing in total of 5 coffe lake cpus, all while taking note of every single difference they had from eachother in regards to auto vcore and avx vcore overshoot etc. and experience from my previous 4790k system which works similarly when using adaptive vcore.


----------



## Robostyle

I'm not looking at working stuff, prejustifying if it is a problem - just trying to sort things out. Moreover, since Intel is deceitful in it's policy regarding OC, manual control and etc., it's being double harder.

Ok, anyway, I've got that already. Plus, I've made my own tests back then - and the only thing that might mislead me, was the vcore being steady while under avx prime, however it gone nuts under much lighter, sporadical load. That didn't sorted with separate avx vids.


----------



## ArneR

Ok, then it might be a different issue all together. Although, your final LLC setting might have something to do with it, a lighter load obviously droops less, making the vcore higher in those circumstances.


----------



## Robostyle

ArneR said:


> Ok, then it might be a different issue all together. Although, your final LLC setting might have something to do with it, a lighter load obviously droops less, making the vcore higher in those circumstances.


Might be. Neverless, voltage goes way higher while launching chrome, than under prime torture. But back then, that wasn't the problem actually - I've been nervous about "medium" load, like gaming, bf1 etc. - voltage was constantly going above mark set as target vcore, staying above it for more than couple of secs, with power draw way off idle state. 
That is also considering my "not that lucky" cpu (which requires ~1.4V for stability at 5GHz) - if it was lucky 1.2V die, I wouldn't bother about all this stuff at all, and this thread would haave been shorter for 1 or 2 pages.


----------



## chibi

Hey there, I currently have the Z370 Apex. Would this board have any issues pushing a 9900K to the max? I have my 8700K delided at 5.0GHz but just don't like the fact that it's not soldered. Also potential for the liquid metal to drip/dry out due to a vertical layout case.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Bunch of updates on Asus support site for Max X Hero.

Audio, Aura, Bluetooth, Chipset, LAN, SATA, VGA, Wireless, QVL. No updated BIOS though.


----------



## Jpmboy

chibi said:


> Hey there, I currently have the Z370 Apex. Would this board have any issues pushing a 9900K to the max? I have my 8700K delided at 5.0GHz but just don't like the fact that it's not soldered. Also potential for the liquid metal to drip/dry out due to a vertical layout case.


should be fine. put the VRM fan on.


----------



## SomebodyOnce

Any Z370 Maximus X Hero owner could help me out? What is the length of SATA cable that comes included with motherboard? There are 4 of them, two straight-angle connector and two straight-straight. I'm interested in length of the latter one.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Isn't the new Chipset_V10.1.17695.8086_20180702_WHQL.zip (on asus website) specifically for 8086K or is the name just misleading me ?


----------



## Jpmboy

"specifically" - no. It's updated for ("to include") the 8086.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Jpmboy said:


> "specifically" - no. It's updated for ("to include") the 8086.


Thanks for the correction and for your answer !


----------



## SpeedyIV

Asus has posted BIOS 1704 for the Max X Hero WIFI. 

ROG MAXIMUS X HERO (WI-FI AC) BIOS 1704
Improved system performance and stability.
Update ME FW to 11.8.55.3510
Update CPU MicroCode

Running this BIOS through UBUTool, looks like CPU uCode is 96
ME FW verified 11.8.55.3510

Updated BIOS did not show up for Max X Hero (NOT WIFI). That page still shows BIOS 1602.


----------



## Robostyle

SpeedyIV said:


> Asus has posted BIOS 1704 for the Max X Hero WIFI.
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS X HERO (WI-FI AC) BIOS 1704
> Improved system performance and stability.
> Update ME FW to 11.8.55.3510
> Update CPU MicroCode
> 
> Running this BIOS through UBUTool, looks like CPU uCode is 96
> ME FW verified 11.8.55.3510
> 
> Updated BIOS did not show up for Max X Hero (NOT WIFI). That page still shows BIOS 1602.


I hope they're gonna release new AI Suite - updated and devoid of that fans bug...


----------



## Jpmboy

unless the board is misbehaving, why update unless you are getting a new 9-series cpu?


----------



## SpeedyIV

Jpmboy said:


> unless the board is misbehaving, why update unless you are getting a new 9-series cpu?


Well, how about "Improved system performance and stability"? I am all for that, though I do wish Asus would actually publish meaningful information about what they changed.

I understand if it ain't broke don't fix it but what I (usually) do when a new BIOS comes out is back everything up, flash the new BIOS, dial back in my settings, and then see if I can do any better. Sometimes yes, sometimes no, most times about the same. If I run into difficulty, I can always go back. I do understand that flashing the BIOS does sometimes also update things that are not so easily rolled back (like uCode and ME Firmware), but thanks to Kedar, I now know how to mod the BIOS modules if necessary. If nobody ever updated their BIOS, we would all still be on 0802, and to me that does not make sense.

As for getting a 9-Series, I am very much planning to do just that, depending on how bad the pricing is when they are released. Me wants an i9-9900K, and I will definitely install it on my Z370 MOBO before I break down and buy a Z390 MOBO. It does never end...


----------



## Jpmboy

SpeedyIV said:


> Well, how about "Improved system performance and stability"? I am all for that, though I do wish Asus would actually publish meaningful information about what they changed.
> 
> I understand if it ain't broke don't fix it but what I (usually) do when a new BIOS comes out is back everything up, flash the new BIOS, dial back in my settings, and then see if I can do any better. *Sometimes yes, sometimes no,* most times about the same. If I run into difficulty, I can always go back. I do understand that flashing the BIOS does sometimes also update things that are not so easily rolled back (like uCode and ME Firmware), but thanks to Kedar, I now know how to mod the BIOS modules if necessary. If nobody ever updated their BIOS, we would all still be on 0802, and to me that does not make sense.
> 
> As for getting a 9-Series, I am very much planning to do just that, depending on how bad the pricing is when they are released. Me wants an i9-9900K, and I will definitely install it on my Z370 MOBO before I break down and buy a Z390 MOBO. It does never end...


 early in the bios maturation, absolutely. Later... mostly the same for me. One would hope that the core-control aspects are corrected/perfected early (as reasonably possible considering it's all within Intel's envelope) and later improvements address add-ons or device changes as they come out. 
Both my x79 and x99 (still running strong) have been very happy with what I call mid-life bioses. But those have not had any hardware changes since.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Jpmboy said:


> early in the bios maturation, absolutely. Later... mostly the same for me. One would hope that the core-control aspects are corrected/perfected early (as reasonably possible considering it's all within Intel's envelope) and later improvements address add-ons or device changes as they come out.
> Both my x79 and x99 (still running strong) have been very happy with what I call mid-life bioses. But those have not had any hardware changes since.


I see your point. I also have a X99 system (5820K) that I really don't futz with much anymore. It's dialed in at a modest OC and is rock stable. I rarely check for updates or the X99 and Haswell-E threads. I also have an X58 rig that has been running with the same factory TIM and pump for 8 years! I'm almost afraid to disturb it. Temps are good so I leave it be. My current rig (Z370) is the one I mess with, and have the most issues with, most of which are self-inflicted. 

Flashing an updated BIOS and looking for new features and improvements, learning how to get into the BIOS and update/regress specific modules, how to load an alternate ME Firmware or uCode - I just like figuring out how to do this stuff because the processes help me to understand more aspects of the overall system and what all is going on under the hood. (Not unlike getting deep into overclocking RAM). My experiments do not always result in increased performance and /or stability! Quite the opposite sometimes. But that's what backups are for and I always learn something. I haven't bricked anything yet, but almost breaking it sure can be FUN!


----------



## Jpmboy

SpeedyIV said:


> I see your point. I also have a X99 system (5820K) that I really don't futz with much anymore. It's dialed in at a modest OC and is rock stable. I rarely check for updates or the X99 and Haswell-E threads. I also have an X58 rig that has been running with the same factory TIM and pump for 8 years! I'm almost afraid to disturb it. Temps are good so I leave it be. My current rig (Z370) is the one I mess with, and have the most issues with, most of which are self-inflicted.
> 
> Flashing an updated BIOS and looking for new features and improvements, learning how to get into the BIOS and update/regress specific modules, how to load an alternate ME Firmware or uCode - I just like figuring out how to do this stuff because the processes help me to understand more aspects of the overall system and what all is going on under the hood. (Not unlike getting deep into overclocking RAM). My experiments do not always result in increased performance and /or stability! Quite the opposite sometimes. But that's what backups are for and I always learn something. I haven't bricked anything yet, but almost breaking it sure can be FUN!


ahhh... haven't had the brick experience yet eh?


----------



## GeneO

Robostyle said:


> I hope they're gonna release new AI Suite - updated and devoid of that fans bug...





What fans bug?


----------



## Robostyle

Something like this 

Sry for quality, rog forum is just a mess, thousands of bugs, so I was unable to get fullsize


----------



## Robostyle

I wonder who’s gonna buy stuff at THESE prices?









So, now you should spend >3000$ (without taxes) to buy simple top gaming pc (but not extreme, keep that in mind)


----------



## Jpmboy

no you should not.


----------



## Tiagobel

Have anyone updated to 1406 bios yet?
I have a Z370-A with a 8700K and since I've updated to 1406 bios, the CPU temperatures are really high under load. No other changes but bios.


----------



## MonarchX

I was unable to stay @ 5Ghz stable up until the most recent BIOS, which allowed me to play Witcher 3 for 4 hours at 5Ghz until the game froze and PC had to be restarted. Here are my settings in TXT and CMO formats. Please let me know if anything needs adjustment! I want 100% stability @ 5Ghz, not 4.9Ghz.

TXT - https://drive.google.com/file/d/14ZuyOybqP7fUDsYHQMUES8xqUlSZ2nCf/view?usp=sharing
CMO - https://drive.google.com/file/d/11gU7p6f_p6UE4y627KQlxIZzaEIqnu0b/view?usp=sharing 


P.S. I am on Windows 10 x64 LTSB 1607 because it is the most stable and gaming-friendly OS out there.


----------



## tostitobandito

Robostyle said:


> I wonder who’s gonna buy stuff at THESE prices?
> 
> So, now you should spend >3000$ (without taxes) to buy simple top gaming pc (but not extreme, keep that in mind)



I'm pretty sure those were from the Canadian Newegg site, so there's an exchange rate to consider. Also, unless they've been stockpiling inventory in the US/Canada prior to this month, basically all motherboards are going to be subject to the new 10% tariff if you're in North America. That will just get added right onto the MSRP.


----------



## Jpmboy

MonarchX said:


> I was unable to stay @ 5Ghz stable up until the most recent BIOS, which allowed me to play Witcher 3 for 4 hours at 5Ghz until the game froze and PC had to be restarted. Here are my settings in TXT and CMO formats. Please let me know if anything needs adjustment! I want 100% stability @ 5Ghz, not 4.9Ghz.
> 
> TXT - https://drive.google.com/file/d/14ZuyOybqP7fUDsYHQMUES8xqUlSZ2nCf/view?usp=sharing
> CMO - https://drive.google.com/file/d/11gU7p6f_p6UE4y627KQlxIZzaEIqnu0b/view?usp=sharing
> 
> 
> P.S. I am on Windows 10 x64 LTSB 1607 because it is the most stable and gaming-friendly OS out there.


some weird settings in there.

XMP? just do the simple thing and clrcmos, set the multiplier to 50, and the vcore to what you "knew" was stable. Change nothing else except you boot priorities as needed. see if the system holds up to your gaming.
also - see the simple OC guide in my sig.


----------



## DerekAz

Jpmboy said:


> some weird settings in there.
> 
> XMP? just do the simple thing and clrcmos, set the multiplier to 50, and the vcore to what you "knew" was stable. Change nothing else except you boot priorities as needed. see if the system holds up to your gaming.
> also - see the simple OC guide in my sig.


Sig..... Signature?

I've been following this thread silently for the past month or so trying to learn something new. Most of it is all Greek to me, just trying to figure out all the acronyms is a chore. Where would I find the easy oc guide. I'm afraid I don't see any signatures or tag lines here or in your profile.

Thanks

Just a guy trying to avoid the cow pies of life.


----------



## Robostyle

Anyway, 600$ for motherboard at 115x isn't normal, if you ask me.


----------



## SpeedyIV

DerekAz said:


> Sig..... Signature?
> 
> I've been following this thread silently for the past month or so trying to learn something new. Most of it is all Greek to me, just trying to figure out all the acronyms is a chore. Where would I find the easy oc guide. I'm afraid I don't see any signatures or tag lines here or in your profile.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Just a guy trying to avoid the cow pies of life.


Welcome to the forum and this thread. There is a lot of great info here, and some really knowledgeable people. Yes Sig means Signature. There is a link at the bottom of JPMBoy's post to his Coffelake OC guide. I have attached a snip of the link and the PDF file. It's a great starting point.


----------



## DerekAz

SpeedyIV said:


> Welcome to the forum and this thread. There is a lot of great info here, and some really knowledgeable people. Yes Sig means Signature. There is a link at the bottom of JPMBoy's post to his Coffelake OC guide. I have attached a snip of the link and the PDF file. It's a great starting point.


Thanks... For some reason I don't see the signatures in the Tapatalk app.

Just a guy trying to avoid the cow pies of life.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> some weird settings in there.
> 
> XMP? just do the simple thing and clrcmos, set the multiplier to 50, and the vcore to what you "knew" was stable. Change nothing else except you boot priorities as needed. see if the system holds up to your gaming.
> also - see the simple OC guide in my sig.


I never knew about the '500' related settings and now I'm RamTest stable at 4266MHZ on RAM with all my 4200 timings and voltages, but I need to drop my cache from 50 to 49. 

Would I be better keeping 4200MHZ with a 50 cache ratio?

Haven't messed with 4300MHZ yet. Here's hoping.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> some weird settings in there.
> 
> XMP? just do the simple thing and clrcmos, set the multiplier to 50, and the vcore to what you "knew" was stable. Change nothing else except you boot priorities as needed. see if the system holds up to your gaming.
> also - see the simple OC guide in my sig.


I never knew about the '500' related settings and now I'm RamTest stable at 4266MHZ on RAM with all my 4200 timings and voltages, but I need to drop my cache from 50 to 49.

Would I be better keeping 4200MHZ with a 50 cache ratio?

Haven't messed with 4300MHZ yet.

@Jpmboy

Can you put here a .txt file of all your 8700k and 8086k Z370 BIOS settings?

I'd like to compare them with mine. I've relied on you so much over the years, would help a ton!! 

Edit: My read/write/copy and latency is better even with only a 49 cache.


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> I never knew about the '500' related settings and now I'm RamTest stable at 4266MHZ on RAM with all my 4200 timings and voltages, but I need to drop my cache from 50 to 49.
> 
> Would I be better keeping 4200MHZ with a 50 cache ratio?
> 
> Haven't messed with 4300MHZ yet.
> 
> @*Jpmboy*
> 
> Can you put here a .txt file of all your 8700k and 8086k Z370 BIOS settings?
> 
> I'd like to compare them with mine. I've relied on you so much over the years, would help a ton!!
> 
> Edit: My read/write/copy and latency is better even with only a 49 cache.


will do bud... as soon as the 8086K rig gets a break (boinc on the 1070Ti). My 8700K is sitting in a drawer right now, but I think I have a txt file saved...


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> will do bud... as soon as the 8086K rig gets a break (boinc on the 1070Ti). My 8700K is sitting in a drawer right now, but I think I have a txt file saved...


k bro, thanks!!

Wait, did I just assume your gender? :drool:


----------



## ChaosAD

So anyone tried the new 1704 bios for the Hero X?


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> k bro, thanks!!
> 
> Wait, did I just assume your gender? :drool:


lol - no assumptions allowed!


Here's two txt files, one for 4400c18 and another for 3866c16 (at low vccio and vsa). I use the latter for long-duration runs, folding and boinc. 4400c18 is pretty good at benching and gaming. I tend to shoot for latency in dual channel platforms, bandwidth in quad and higher.


edit - shoiot, forgot to drop a txt for 3866. will do.


----------



## Jpmboy

for anyone still struggling with this VID and vcore thing... here's a prime example as to why this 8086 must run manual override!


----------



## renhanxue

Jpmboy said:


> for anyone still struggling with this VID and vcore thing... here's a prime example as to why this 8086 must run manual override!


Isn't that scenario what the adaptive mode offset voltage is for? Or would the negative offset be so big in this case that it'd be unstable at low/idle loads? In that case I guess what we'd really need is a negative LLC setting :V


----------



## Robostyle

ChaosAD said:


> So anyone tried the new 1704 bios for the Hero X?


I don't think that will be widely relevant from now on - 580$ for 9900k is too much, at this moment, considering 2080 Ti is a no-brainer, but it still gives you +10fps. 

That's just ridiculous, how price for gaming cpu+gpu raised for the last year....


----------



## renhanxue

Few - if even any - games can utilize even the 12 threads the 8700K has to any meaningful degree. If it's actually a gaming PC there's absolutely no reason to pay more than $100 extra for getting 8 more threads over the 9700K. If you already have an 8700K there's no reason to upgrade to a 9700K for two more cores you don't need, either. Single threaded performance is going to be almost identical between the 8th and 9th generation, at least assuming you've delidded the 8th generation CPU and is overclocking it (wait, what forum am I on again?). You _might_ get another 100-200 MHz out of a 9th generation but that's barely even measurable in gaming fps. CPU improvement over time has now slowed down to the point that if you have an 8700K in your current gaming machine, there's no reason to believe you'll have any particularly pressing need to upgrade it for many years yet.

And if you want a lot of threads for not a lot of money, there's always Ryzen, you know?

e: I'll upgrade to 1704 tomorrow and report back


----------



## Robostyle

True. 

But if prices were like year ago, so I could buy all the stuff for ~1000$ - I would buy it whatever. Just in order to try it out. 
However, with this price rise, I think 95% of users will think thrice before buying it all.


----------



## Jpmboy

renhanxue said:


> Isn't that scenario what the adaptive mode offset voltage is for? Or would the negative offset be so big in this case that it'd be unstable at low/idle loads? In that case I guess what we'd really need is a negative LLC setting :V


yeah - at some point for me, the combination of neg offset and turbo voltage is just too silly to bother with (and yes - testing stability in the idle state is near impossible). With all c-states enabled, the on-die voltage drop for manual override is the same as adaptive (both go to zero at the die-level). Manual override is less "fudged" and fully disconnected from the VID (which is the problem in the first place!). just my opinion...


----------



## SpeedyIV

Jpmboy said:


> yeah - at some point for me, the combination of neg offset and turbo voltage is just too silly to bother with (and yes - testing stability in the idle state is near impossible). With all c-states enabled, the on-die voltage drop for manual override is the same as adaptive (both go to zero at the die-level). Manual override is less "fudged" and fully disconnected from the VID (which is the problem in the first place!). just my opinion...


So full C-states gives Manual the same advantage of lower (but sufficient) voltage while at or near idle as Adaptive with a negative offset. And for a chip that happens to have VID tables higher than they need to be, it's easier in Manual (with C-states) to get stable under high, low, and idle states, and reap the same lower power/heat benefits, than with Adaptive with a negative offset and SVID, load lines trying to compensate. 

That makes sense, but is it also as good or better than Adaptive (with neg offset, SVID, & load lines) for a chip that has "correct" VID tables? So Manual may be preferred over Adaptive in general? With Adaptive, it seems like you set your desired full load VCore, but then it over shoots, so you add droop, but then it undervolts, so you mess with load lines... Manual is certainly more straightforward, and with C-states as "developed" as they are, is Adaptive "worth it"? What do you really get, at least on this platform. It seems like Adaptive has always been problematic on Z370, Asus says the idiosyncrasies are due to Intel rules...


----------



## Jpmboy

SpeedyIV said:


> So full C-states gives Manual the same advantage of lower (but sufficient) voltage while at or near idle as Adaptive with a negative offset. And for a chip that happens to have VID tables higher than they need to be, it's easier in Manual (with C-states) to get stable under high, low, and idle states, and reap the same lower power/heat benefits, than with Adaptive with a negative offset and SVID, load lines trying to compensate.
> 
> That makes sense, but is it also as good or better than Adaptive (with neg offset, SVID, & load lines) for a chip that has "correct" VID tables? So Manual may be preferred over Adaptive in general? With Adaptive, it seems like you set your desired full load VCore, but then it over shoots, so you add droop, but then it undervolts, so you mess with load lines... Manual is certainly more straightforward, and with C-states as "developed" as they are, is Adaptive "worth it"? What do you really get, at least on this platform. It seems like Adaptive has always been problematic on Z370, Asus says the idiosyncrasies are due to Intel rules...


If the VID is sane, then go with adaptive, My 8700K does not have this problem and runs 5.2 adaptive with no VID-based overvoltage, my 8086K does. :blinksmil


----------



## wingman99

Jpmboy said:


> for anyone still struggling with this VID and vcore thing... here's a prime example as to why this 8086 must run manual override!


Have you tried IA AC/DC 0.01 with adaptive?


----------



## renhanxue

In the settings txt file he posted on the previous page, IA AC/DC Load Line are both set to 0.01 but SVID Behavior is set to auto. That might be the cause for the very high VID's. IA AC/DC doesn't control VID directly in my experience.



ChaosAD said:


> So anyone tried the new 1704 bios for the Hero X?


I updated from BIOS 1401 to 1704 today. No issues, holds same overclock as before and judging by a quick CrystalDiskMark test, I/O performance hasn't changed either.

I did notice a few new things in the BIOS that weren't there before as far as I can remember, though. There's a new SVID Behavior option called "Intel fail-safe"; I didn't try it but I doubt it's useful to me. There's also a new setting where you can enable/disable support for Intel's Thermal Velocity Boost, which wouldn't be useful to me even if the 8700K actually supported it, because I'm already overclocking manually.


----------



## tiefox

Not sure if it has been discussed here before, but I upgraded my MX Apex Bios to the latest one this past weekend and was finally able to run XMP on my gskill 4266 c19 16gb kit  Super happy!


----------



## Jpmboy

renhanxue said:


> In the settings txt file he posted on the previous page, IA AC/DC Load Line are both set to 0.01 *but SVID Behavior is set to auto*. That might be the cause for the very high VID's. IA AC/DC doesn't control VID directly in my experience.
> 
> 
> 
> I updated from BIOS 1401 to 1704 today. No issues, holds same overclock as before and judging by a quick CrystalDiskMark test, I/O performance hasn't changed either.
> 
> I did notice a few new things in the BIOS that weren't there before as far as I can remember, though. There's a new SVID Behavior option called "Intel fail-safe"; I didn't try it but I doubt it's useful to me. There's also a new setting where you can enable/disable support for Intel's Thermal Velocity Boost, which wouldn't be useful to me even if the 8700K actually supported it, because I'm already overclocking manually.



the "Auto" rules are linked to the voltage mode... so Auto will disable SVID when manual voltage mode is selected, and will enable/default the SVID comm link (on) when Adaptive or offset is selected. If you disable SVID, adaptive mode is not shown in the voltage mode drop-down list. You can leave SVID on Auto for either. SVID "mode" eg, best case, INtel default, applies an offset to the VID request so, best case uses a neg offset, intel default uses zero offset.. etc. With my 8700K I use "best case". With manual vcore, it is of course not relevant. 

Regarding IA load lines - these Ohm/resistance settings need not be changed from Auto once you get past the first few bios releases (and setting them to 0.01 in the "mature" bioses has no detrimental effect). I just left them on 0.01. It is not necessary in the bios version I am running - imply a residual. Besides, has no meaning with manual override anyway. For my 8700K (it is an ES sample) NONE of these problems exist because it's VID is spot on and runs 5.2 with 1.35V adaptive, LLC 5, no offset needed. See the Guide linked in my sig block. Lastly, if using W10, disable speed step and enable speed shift. It just works better. Even my 7980XE is set this way with adaptive or manual vcore - all c-states enabled. :thumb:


----------



## renhanxue

Jpmboy said:


> the "Auto" rules are linked to the voltage mode... so Auto will disable SVID when manual voltage mode is selected, and will enable/default the SVID comm link (on) when Adaptive or offset is selected. If you disable SVID, adaptive mode is not shown in the voltage mode drop-down list. You can leave SVID on Auto for either. SVID "mode" eg, best case, INtel default, applies an offset to the VID request so, best case uses a neg offset, intel default uses zero offset.. etc. With my 8700K I use "best case". With manual vcore, it is of course not relevant.


Of course the VID doesn't actually do anything in manual voltage mode. In your screenshot though you highlighted a very high VID in contrast to the much lower actual Vcore, and even in manual mode the VID still varies and SVID Behavior still affects the reported VID, despite manual voltage settings making the VID completely irrelevant. It'd be more interesting to see what the VID would be with "best case" settings.



Jpmboy said:


> Regarding IA load lines - these Ohm/resistance settings need not be changed from Auto once you get past the first few bios releases (and setting them to 0.01 in the "mature" bioses has no detrimental effect). I just left them on 0.01.


This may or may not have been true at some point (I know Raja said you didn't need it anymore a long time ago) but last time I tested it back in June, leaving them on auto had some very disturbing effects. I found that if you leave them on auto it seems to have the effect of making LLC super strong, so on LLC5 I was getting a 0.15v overshoot above VID, which landed me around 1.5v vcore - a place where I most definitely didn't want to be on ambient cooling, so I didn't stick around for very long. I haven't tested it again since then but they're currently at 0.01 and LLC5 leaves me with ~0.03v vdroop like it should.

e: it would be very nice if someone could actually explain exactly what those settings are _supposed_ to do, though



Jpmboy said:


> Lastly, if using W10, disable speed step and enable speed shift. It just works better.


In what way? Is the effect measurable? Can you link any documentation of what is different between the two?


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> for anyone still struggling with this VID and vcore thing... here's a prime example as to why this 8086 must run manual override!


https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4266c17q-32gtzr

4x8GB 4266MHZ, CL17 Z390/Z370 compatibility.

With this new revision of RGB RAM, you think they fixed the shortfalls on earlier RGB kits.

It looks like it's much better than the 4x8GB 4133MHZ CL19 kit.

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4133c19q-32gtzkkf

https://www.anandtech.com/show/12079/gskill-launches-ddr4-4000-32gb-dimm-kits


----------



## renhanxue

Went back and re-tested SVID Behavior and IA AC/DC and can report the following.

System: i7-8700K, Maximus X Hero WiFi (BIOS version 1704)
Baseline settings:
- 49x all-core ratio, 46x uncore, no AVX offset
- Adaptive mode, 1.36v, offset -0.02v
- SVID Behavior: Best Case
- LLC 5
- IA AC/DC Load Line: 0.01

Baseline results (with AVX benchmark, that's why VID is higher than the 1.34v it'd normally be):











Rebooted, set SVID Behavior to Auto: no change, everything exactly the same as before.

Rebooted again, set SVID Behavior back to Best Case, set IA AC/DC Load Line to Auto. Results (at Windows desktop, didn't dare a benchmark, just took the screenshot and bailed out):










Note the spicy *1.5v* vcore. Don't try this at home, kids.


So, well, I was probably wrong above when I said that SVID Behavior would change Jpmboy's VID. Also, Raja had it the wrong way around. He said that setting SVID Behavior to "Best Case" would also automatically set IA AC/DC to 0.01, but it seems like IA AC/DC is what's actually controlling VID and the LLC magnitude while SVID Behavior seems to do absolutely nothing (or at least it seems to do nothing if you have manually set IA AC/DC). Well, now you know.

e: by the way, yes, my board is one of the (rare?) Hero boards that does have a VRM temp sensor.


----------



## SpeedyIV

renhanxue said:


> Of course the VID doesn't actually do anything in manual voltage mode. In your screenshot though you highlighted a very high VID in contrast to the much lower actual Vcore, and even in manual mode the VID still varies and SVID Behavior still affects the reported VID, despite manual voltage settings making the VID completely irrelevant. It'd be more interesting to see what the VID would be with "best case" settings.
> 
> 
> This may or may not have been true at some point (I know Raja said you didn't need it anymore a long time ago) but last time I tested it back in June, leaving them on auto had some very disturbing effects. I found that if you leave them on auto it seems to have the effect of making LLC super strong, so on LLC5 I was getting a 0.15v overshoot above VID, which landed me around 1.5v vcore - a place where I most definitely didn't want to be on ambient cooling, so I didn't stick around for very long. I haven't tested it again since then but they're currently at 0.01 and LLC5 leaves me with ~0.03v vdroop like it should.
> 
> e: it would be very nice if someone could actually explain exactly what those settings are _supposed_ to do, though
> 
> 
> In what way? Is the effect measurable? Can you link any documentation of what is different between the two?


Hmmm. That is interesting. I specifically remember Raja posting that setting SVID to Best Case Scenario set the load lines to .01. I always just set them to .01 anyway but never really checked to see if not doing that caused any effect. Looks like from your test, it does. Then again, you (and I) are now on later BIOS so maybe that is not true anymore?

I do agree it sure would be nice if Asus released some actually meaningful explanations of what some of these settings do, and a real revision log for the BIOS releases. "Improved system performance and stability" really does not tell me anything, though it does sound good in theory!


----------



## Jpmboy

renhanxue said:


> Went back and re-tested SVID Behavior and IA AC/DC and can report the following.
> 
> System: i7-8700K, Maximus X Hero WiFi (BIOS version 1704)
> Baseline settings:
> - 49x all-core ratio, 46x uncore, no AVX offset
> - Adaptive mode, 1.36v, offset -0.02v
> - SVID Behavior: Best Case
> - LLC 5
> - IA AC/DC Load Line: 0.01
> 
> Baseline results (with AVX benchmark, that's why VID is higher than the 1.34v it'd normally be):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rebooted, set SVID Behavior to Auto: no change, everything exactly the same as before.
> 
> Rebooted again, set SVID Behavior back to Best Case, set IA AC/DC Load Line to Auto. Results (at Windows desktop, didn't dare a benchmark, just took the screenshot and bailed out):
> 
> 
> 
> Note the spicy *1.5v* vcore. Don't try this at home, kids.
> 
> 
> So, well, I was probably wrong above when I said that SVID Behavior would change Jpmboy's VID. Also, Raja had it the wrong way around. He said that setting SVID Behavior to "Best Case" would also automatically set IA AC/DC to 0.01, but it seems like IA AC/DC is what's actually controlling VID and the LLC magnitude while SVID Behavior seems to do absolutely nothing (or at least it seems to do nothing if you have manually set IA AC/DC). Well, now you know.
> 
> e: by the way, yes, my board is one of the (rare?) Hero boards that does have a VRM temp sensor.


 I guess I was not clear. There are two settings: SVID Behavior and CPU SVID Support. CPU SVID Support can be left on Auto regardless of voltage control mode, SVID behavior.. yeah, this is set to *best case *with adaptive or offset... unless I'm using manual override and then SVID-anything is not relevant.
Load lines are 0.01 

So... in summary - my 8700K ES, runs adaptive spot on, best case, support=auto, llc 5, no offset. My 8086K will not do so as the VID for 5.2 on all cores is higher than 1.285V which is stable (by a lot, no matter the settings). I also have 4 other CFLs: 2 8600Ks and 2 8350Ks. All delided, and only one of the 4 has the VID issue, the other three behave properly. Honestly, the 8086K clocks higher and lower voltage (it should considering the substrate binning), but the 8700K's IMC is much better tho it needs 1.35V for 5.2 to be stable to the same regime.


----------



## Robostyle

Please advice, what's the best option to replace antennas that come with M10H


----------



## feznz

Just a question about PC hanging sometime maybe 20 secs or so just audio is fine just everything just hangs happens on desktop and in game then corrects itself as nothing has happened.
Looked at event viewer nothing there have also downclocked a little to be sure.
I still not been happy with PC since the KB4456655 Windows update just never has been the same


----------



## Whisko

Hello, I'm having a issue with my PC that has stumped me. Seems to be similar to what feznz is going through but who knows. Specs below. 



Recently i noticed while using my PC that it will randomly hang/freeze for 10-20secs then will work normal as before afterwards. It's very random and doesn't happen frequently but it happens. I just recently updated to Windows v1803 and i'm not sure if it still hanged/freezed on the previous version of Windows since the PC has not gotten any use in the last 8 months due to me being busy with work. 



I checked the event logs and nothing stuck out at me. I did some tests on my hard drives that checked out good. I swapped my PSU out with a new one i had sitting around in a box as i've seen PSU's do weird things like this in the past but it did the same thing with the new PSU. I ran memtest on my ram and that all came back clean. I reset my bios and still same thing. Made sure all drivers are current for all the hardware. All the temperatures looked good on the hardware. Lastly i did a clean install of Windows 10 with the Microsoft Media Creation Tool. 



Meanwhile my old Sandy i5 2500k build runs solid as a rock after all these years and it's on Windows v1803 also. The 2500k build has been the most stable computer i have ever owned and is the last build in recent memory where i truly felt good about a purchase.


Beats me though. Maybe if i kick it then it will work. Use to work on old boomboxes in the 80's when they acted up.





Specs:


OS: Windows 10 x64 v1803

CPU: i5 [email protected] 4.3GHz
SSD: Samsung 850 EVO 250gb (System Drive)
HDD: Seagate Barracuda 7200RPM 2tb (Media Storage)
RAM: Corsair DDR4 3000MHz 2x8gb=16gb
BOARD: Asus Prime Z370-A
PSU: Corsair RM850i
GPU: EVGA GTX 1070 FTW 8gb


----------



## GeneO

Whisko said:


> Hello, I'm having a issue with my PC that has stumped me. Seems to be similar to what feznz is going through but who knows. Specs below.
> 
> 
> 
> Recently i noticed while using my PC that it will randomly hang/freeze for 10-20secs then will work normal as before afterwards. It's very random and doesn't happen frequently but it happens. I just recently updated to Windows v1803 and i'm not sure if it still hanged/freezed on the previous version of Windows since the PC has not gotten any use in the last 8 months due to me being busy with work.
> 
> 
> 
> I checked the event logs and nothing stuck out at me. I did some tests on my hard drives that checked out good. I swapped my PSU out with a new one i had sitting around in a box as i've seen PSU's do weird things like this in the past but it did the same thing with the new PSU. I ran memtest on my ram and that all came back clean. I reset my bios and still same thing. Made sure all drivers are current for all the hardware. All the temperatures looked good on the hardware. Lastly i did a clean install of Windows 10 with the Microsoft Media Creation Tool. Meanwhile my old Sandy i5 2500k build runs solid as a rock after all these years and it's on Windows v1803 also. The 2500k build has been the most stable computer i've ever owned and was the last system where i felt good about my purchase.
> 
> 
> 
> Beats me. Maybe if i kick it then it will work. Use to work on old boomboxes in the 80's when they acted up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Specs:
> 
> 
> OS: Windows 10 x64 v1803
> 
> CPU: i5 [email protected] 4.3GHz
> RAM: Corsair DDR4 3000MHz 2x8gb=16gb
> BOARD: Asus Prime Z370-A
> PSU: Corsair RM850i
> GPU: EVGA GTX 1070 FTW 8gb



What disk and disk controller/drivers are you using?


----------



## Whisko

GeneO said:


> What disk and disk controller/drivers are you using?



Yep forgot to mention my disk. I'm using a Samsung 250gb Evo 850 for my main system drive and a 2tb Seagate Barracuda for media storage. The driver i'm using is the newest one listed on winraid labeled 64bit Intel RST AHCI & RAID driver v16.7.1.1012 WHQL. I tried the one listed on the Asus website also and it was still hanging/freezing at times.


I'm not using raid or anything fancy, just the traditional AHCI driver i load up when installing Windows 10.


*Edit* Thanks for taking the time to reply.


----------



## GeneO

Whisko said:


> Yep forgot to mention my disk. I'm using a Samsung 250gb Evo 850 for my main system drive and a 2tb Seagate Barracuda for media storage. The driver i'm using is the newest one listed on winraid labeled 64bit Intel RST AHCI & RAID driver v16.7.1.1012 WHQL. I tried the one listed on Asus website also and it was still hanging/freezing at times.
> 
> 
> I'm not using raid or anything just the traditional AHCI driver i load up when installing Windows 10.
> 
> 
> *Edit* Thanks for taking the time to reply.



I had the same type of freezing with the RST drivers that were updated along with 1809. I rolled back to 16.0.2.1086 and the freezing went away.


----------



## Whisko

Just got done loading up Linux Mint for a quick Linux run and go for testing, the system is working great so far. Will have to use it some more though to see if it hangs like it was when using Windows 10.


----------



## Whisko

GeneO said:


> I had the same type of freezing with the RST drivers that were updated along with 1809. I rolled back to 16.0.2.1086 and the freezing went away.



Nice one, I'm going to give that version a try. It's good to know my hardware didn't shoot the poot though. I'm testing Linux Mint now. I will give v16.0.2.1086 driver a go on Windows 10 when i'm done fiddling with Linux. Thanks for helping me out. 

Freezing and hanging issues are always a crap shoot as it can be literally anything or a combination of things. I always have to consult the experts with these types of issues as i can usually hold my own on most problems that don't involve freezes/hangs. Thanks again and sorry my English grammar is not the best but getting better.


----------



## feznz

GeneO said:


> I had the same type of freezing with the RST drivers that were updated along with 1809. I rolled back to 16.0.2.1086 and the freezing went away.


Looks like it worked for me fingers crossed


----------



## Whisko

feznz said:


> Looks like it worked for me fingers crossed



Looking good here from my end also. I installed sata driver v16.0.2.1086 and no problems so far in the past few hours. Crossing my fingers also, might also stick one in my butt for good measure so i can get the one up on feznz. Thanks for the tip GeneO! Have a good day all.


----------



## GeneO

Well awesome. Glad I could help!


----------



## feznz

GeneO said:


> Well awesome. Glad I could help!


I am GLAD too you could help...........was considering re-installing windows :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

you guys must be running raids - right? else why install RST at all (tho it is not needed for raiding drives)?


----------



## GeneO

Jpmboy said:


> you guys must be running raids - right? else why install RST at all (tho it is not needed for raiding drives)?



In the past, RST non-raid drivers have outperformed Microsoft generic drivers. Not sure if that is still true though.


----------



## Jpmboy

GeneO said:


> In the past, RST non-raid drivers have outperformed Microsoft generic drivers. Not sure if that is still true though.


yeah, I only run a couple of raid systems (usually only for executables, not the OS) Dropped RST many moons ago. But I have not run limit tests to see if there is a performance difference w w/o RST.


----------



## feznz

I ran it because Intel states;
"Intel® Rapid Storage Technology offers greater levels of performance, responsiveness, and expandability than ever before. Whether you are using one or multiple serial ATA (SATA) or PCIe drives, 
you can take advantage of enhanced performance and lower power consumption from the latest storage technologies. Additionally, you can rest easy knowing you have added protection against data loss in the event of a hard drive failure."


thinking it might take the proformance up to Samsung rated speed of upto 3200MB/Sec Read 1900MB/Sec Write never been able to get near the rated speed but it still pretty dam fast so not too worried abou it thinking it might be a chipset limitation 

So happy the freeze hang has gone I put up with it hoping a windows update might fix it one day...…..


----------



## GeneO

feznz said:


> I ran it because Intel states;
> "Intel® Rapid Storage Technology offers greater levels of performance, responsiveness, and expandability than ever before. Whether you are using one or multiple serial ATA (SATA) or PCIe drives,
> you can take advantage of enhanced performance and lower power consumption from the latest storage technologies. Additionally, you can rest easy knowing you have added protection against data loss in the event of a hard drive failure."
> 
> 
> thinking it might take the proformance up to Samsung rated speed of upto 3200MB/Sec Read 1900MB/Sec Write never been able to get near the rated speed but it still pretty dam fast so not too worried abou it thinking it might be a chipset limitation
> 
> So happy the freeze hang has gone I put up with it hoping a windows update might fix it one day...…..



Funny thing is that Intel no longer lists 16.0.2.1086 on their download pages (that is where I got it). They only list the broken 16.5.1.1030. There is no good avenue for reporting this serious bug I think - their support forum appears to not be very fruitful from my experience.


----------



## Whisko

GeneO said:


> Funny thing is that Intel no longer lists 16.0.2.1086 on their download pages (that is where I got it). They only list the broken 16.5.1.1030. There is no good avenue for reporting this serious bug I think - their support forum appears to not be very fruitful from my experience.



Odd, i got the v16.0.2.1086 driver directly from Asus support page for my Prime Z370-A board. After further testing i can say without out a doubt that mine has quit freezing/hanging with the v16.0.2.1086 driver compared to the newer v16.7.1.1012 driver i was using before. Intel needs to get it together already but it could also be a Windows 10 issue which has been a nightmare lately with broken updates.


----------



## GeneO

Whisko said:


> Odd, i got the v16.0.2.1086 driver directly from Asus support page for my Prime Z370-A board. After further testing i can say without out a doubt that mine has quit freezing/hanging with the v16.0.2.1086 driver compared to the newer v16.7.1.1012 driver i was using before. Intel needs to get it together already but it could also be a Windows 10 issue which has been a nightmare lately with broken updates.



I could swear I downloaded the 16.5.whatever with 1803 and had some freezes so removed it then. It is all a blur though. LOL.


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> I could swear I downloaded the 16.5.whatever with 1803 and had some freezes so removed it then. It is all a blur though. LOL.


I'm running RAID 0 with two M.2 960 Pro's from the 16.7 version found here with no issues.

https://www.win-raid.com/t2f23-Intel-RST-RSTe-Drivers-newest-v-WHQL-v-WHQL.html

Actually, I was running a really old version from 2015. When I add drivers to my Windows LTSC 2019 install.wim and boot.wim they don't load at all during the install. 

Had to manually install all the drivers I thought were installed. 

Edit: I installed LTSC 2019 'N' version last Windows install but hadn't applied the drivers to that index. 

My Bad.


----------



## gammagoat

I can't seem to find these two settings on my Hero X, CPU input and CPU eventual. Have they changed what they are called? Or are these settings no longer available?


----------



## xenphor

Anybody know if an asus z370-I Strix ITX board could handle the 9900k without throttling? Technically it is supported on their cpu list but I'm assuming that doesn't guarantee any sort of performance above the base clock right?


----------



## renhanxue

gammagoat said:


> I can't seem to find these two settings on my Hero X, CPU input and CPU eventual. Have they changed what they are called? Or are these settings no longer available?


I have no recollection of ever seeing those particular settings in my Hero X BIOS. What would they do?


----------



## HeyThereGuy

Figured I would post here to see if anyone has had this issue or knows how to fix it as it has me baffled.. I have a Maximus X Formula and am having an issue with fan speeds.. It does not matter which header I plug the front rad fan or fans into they will run at 100% speed. Changing settings for that particular header does nothing. They will slow down slightly if I set the CPU fan header to DC power. They aren't however plugged into this header... I reflashed the BIOS to set fan speeds back to default with no success. Any insight?


----------



## encrypted11

Read more


Spoiler






















 @Jpmboy
https://www.intel.com/content/dam/w...heets/8th-gen-core-family-datasheet-vol-1.pdf


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ Thanks. Added to the OP (the 8th gen pdf has been there)


----------



## schoolofmonkey

So has anyone tried a 9900k in a z370 Apex yet?


----------



## thebski

schoolofmonkey said:


> So has anyone tried a 9900k in a z370 Apex yet?


I'm interested to find out the same information. It's really frustrating that Asus isn't planning on releasing the Gene in North America and apparently they aren't building the Apex at all. Those are really the only two boards I would be interested in. I will drop a 9900K in my M10 Apex if it will allow it to stretch it's legs. Otherwise I guess I'll skip this gen.


----------



## kens30

thebski said:


> I'm interested to find out the same information. It's really frustrating that Asus isn't planning on releasing the Gene in North America and apparently they aren't building the Apex at all. Those are really the only two boards I would be interested in. I will drop a 9900K in my M10 Apex if it will allow it to stretch it's legs. Otherwise I guess I'll skip this gen.


Here is the Maximus XI Apex
https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-XI-APEX/

If anyone has a i9 9900k paired with Maximus X board Z370 please post any feedback...


----------



## SpeedyIV

thebski said:


> I'm interested to find out the same information. It's really frustrating that Asus isn't planning on releasing the Gene in North America and apparently they aren't building the Apex at all. Those are really the only two boards I would be interested in. I will drop a 9900K in my M10 Apex if it will allow it to stretch it's legs. Otherwise I guess I'll skip this gen.


https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-XI-APEX/overview/


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> ^^ Thanks. Added to the OP (the 8th gen pdf has been there)


 @Jpmboy,

If I'm not interested in USB 3.2 etc. and my Maximus X Formula gets 60C on the VRMs WITHOUT water cooling them while stress testing, you think it'll overclock a 9900k just as good as an Asus Z390 board?

Edit: @Jpmboy

For you. 

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-XI-APEX/


----------



## Jpmboy

you have a fan on the vrms? If yes, it should be manageable. one thing to consider is popping off the vrm on the MaxXF and replacing the pad with fuji/sarcon. ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> you have a fan on the vrms? If yes, it should be manageable. one thing to consider is popping off the vrm on the MaxXF and replacing the pad with fuji/sarcon. ?


I have a 3500 RPM memory fan on the memory and a 140MM fan blowing air in the top back of the case, but the VRM cooling on my Formula is really good, hovers around 60C on the most demanding stress tests use like RealBench, MemTest, HCI etc. so i think I'll be fine with a 9900k. Want to stay under 80C on the VRMs ideally, right?

But what I'm asking is will Z370 perform just as good as Z390 MB's OCing?


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> I have a 3500 RPM memory fan on the memory and a 140MM fan blowing air in the top back of the case, but the VRM cooling on my Formula is really good, hovers around 60C on the most demanding stress tests use like RealBench, MemTest, HCI etc. so i think I'll be fine with a 9900k. Want to stay under 80C on the VRMs ideally, right?
> 
> But what I'm asking is will Z370 perform just as good as Z390 MB's OCing?


yeah - it should be fine. A small gelid fan right on the VRM is all you night need... see how the temps are. I wouldn't worry at this point.


----------



## thebski

kens30 said:


> Here is the Maximus XI Apex
> https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-XI-APEX/
> 
> If anyone has a i9 9900k paired with Maximus X board Z370 please post any feedback...





SpeedyIV said:


> https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-XI-APEX/overview/


They must have just added the page for it because I've seen no mention of it up until the links you guys posted and I've looked all over for information about it. Now it is in the list with all of the other Z390 boards in the article on the front page of the ROG website. I hope it's coming to North America. It doesn't sound like the Gene is.


----------



## FlanK3r

schoolofmonkey said:


> So has anyone tried a 9900k in a z370 Apex yet?


yes, local huys tested it yesterday with LN2 
http://hwbot.org/submission/3966812_elkim_cinebench___r15_core_i9_9900k_2944_cb


----------



## Scotty99

Can i get some advice on how to fix the lights on my z370-f strix board?

It randomly stopped working out of the blue one day (after working for months) and not only do i need to reset my PC for the lights to turn back on, when they are on the aura software does not recognize "motherboard". I have the latest bios and aura release and have also uninstalled/reinstalled aura. Every time i do a shutdown the lights dont work until i unplug my PC from power for ~30 seconds.


----------



## KedarWolf

Scotty99 said:


> Can i get some advice on how to fix the lights on my z370-f strix board?
> 
> It randomly stopped working out of the blue one day (after working for months) and not only do i need to reset my PC for the lights to turn back on, when they are on the aura software does not recognize "motherboard". I have the latest bios and aura release and have also uninstalled/reinstalled aura. Every time i do a shutdown the lights dont work until i unplug my PC from power for ~30 seconds.


I'm pretty sure there are Aura related BIOS settings. You check those?


----------



## Scotty99

KedarWolf said:


> I'm pretty sure there are Aura related BIOS settings. You check those?


Yup, under advanced there is a "onboard device setting" which controls the LED, i have mine set to working when PC is on and off when its off.

Really at a loss here, i know its not defective because it works after i unplug the PC from the wall it just does not want to communicate with aura whatsoever lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> Can i get some advice on how to fix the lights on my z370-f strix board?
> 
> It randomly stopped working out of the blue one day (after working for months) and not only do i need to reset my PC for the lights to turn back on, when they are on the aura software does not recognize "motherboard". I have the latest bios and aura release and have also uninstalled/reinstalled aura. Every time i do a shutdown the lights dont work until i unplug my PC from power for ~30 seconds.


by "reset my pc" do you mean clrcmos or just a cold restart?


----------



## sdch

thebski said:


> I'm interested to find out the same information. It's really frustrating that Asus isn't planning on releasing the Gene in North America and apparently they aren't building the Apex at all. Those are really the only two boards I would be interested in. I will drop a 9900K in my M10 Apex if it will allow it to stretch it's legs. Otherwise I guess I'll skip this gen.


Silicon Lottery added the M10A to their QVL for CFL-R so that's a good sign.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Bought a 9900k from newegg.ca, comes tue or wed.

Will have it installed in the Apex X. See how it goes, will get the Apex XI regardless when it releases.


----------



## tiefox

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Bought a 9900k from newegg.ca, comes tue or wed.
> 
> Will have it installed in the Apex X. See how it goes, will get the Apex XI regardless when it releases.


Really curious on how that goes as I also have an Apex X.


----------



## Jpmboy

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Bought a 9900k from newegg.ca, comes tue or wed.
> 
> Will have it installed in the Apex X. See how it goes, will get the Apex XI regardless when it releases.


 will be plug n play. 
hopefully I'l be able to post up some z390/9900K results soon... maybe start a 390 thread or just keep it here??


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Hey Jpmboy…

I know it'll work fine off the hop, but will the new z390 boards with the better vrms push the chip better?

Guess I'll see soon enough, I'm thinking it'll be good.  

I'll post back here when the chip is in the board. Waiting on Titan Turing now, hope it comes!:thumb:


----------



## Scotty99

Jpmboy said:


> by "reset my pc" do you mean clrcmos or just a cold restart?


Sorry, meant unplug the system from power. Right now they are off and wont work until i do that, once i do they will turn on but aura wont recognize them.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> Sorry, meant unplug the system from power. Right now they are off and wont work until i do that, once i do they will turn on but aura wont recognize them.


could be a corrupted or unstable bios (settings). Does this happen after a CLRCMOS>


----------



## KedarWolf

Scotty99 said:


> Sorry, meant unplug the system from power. Right now they are off and won't work until I do that, once i do they will turn on but aura won't recognize them.


Maybe CMOS reset, then reflash BIOS. You can save your profile to a USB, it'll work if you flash the same BIOS as you're using. Or save a BIOS .txt file, flash latest BIOS and manually set your related settings.


----------



## feznz

Scotty99 said:


> Sorry, meant unplug the system from power. Right now they are off and wont work until i do that, once i do they will turn on but aura wont recognize them.



Apex X had a bug for the Aura but that was intial realse bios I believe.


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ probably best to first see if it occurs at bone stock settings.


----------



## chibi

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Bought a 9900k from newegg.ca, comes tue or wed.
> 
> Will have it installed in the Apex X. See how it goes, will get the Apex XI regardless when it releases.



My newegg 9900K order shows Wed 31st as delivery. Thinking about taking apart my loop and replacing my hot/mediocre 8700K with it. Our builds are pretty similar judging by our sigs. :thumb:



Jpmboy said:


> will be plug n play.
> hopefully I'l be able to post up some z390/9900K results soon... maybe start a 390 thread or just keep it here??



My vote is a proper thread run by yours truly JP! The last few big threads have been started by early adopters just looking to cache in on epeen with no support for an OP for all things related. :thumbsdow


----------



## Jpmboy

chibi said:


> My newegg 9900K order shows Wed 31st as delivery. Thinking about taking apart my loop and replacing my hot/mediocre 8700K with it. Our builds are pretty similar judging by our sigs. :thumb:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My vote is a proper thread run by yours truly JP! The last few big threads have been started by early adopters just looking to cache in on epeen with no support for an OP for all things related. :thumbsdow



^^ vote logged.


----------



## chibi

Jpmboy said:


> ^^ vote logged.



Thanks, I understand it's a lot of work and it's really appreciated! :thumb:


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> will be plug n play.
> hopefully I'l be able to post up some z390/9900K results soon... maybe start a 390 thread or just keep it here??


Z390 and a 9*00k thread would be great!!


----------



## Jpmboy

I think that's a majority.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

chibi , mine says Wednesday too. Will clean my loop and parts, it's time. Then install the 9900k badboy.


and thanks Jpmboy, always willing to help us out!


----------



## KedarWolf

Picking up a 9900k in the a.m. I'll post how it works with my Maximus X Formula. That board has a decent VRM and on my 8700k at 1.375v the VRMs stay around 60C WITHOUT water cooling while stress testing. I read about someone that got 5.2GHZ on their Z370 Formula at 1.36v. :h34r-smi

Edit: i'm going to try to load my 8700k BIOS settings which is 5.1 GHZ CPU, 4.9 GHZ cache, 4200 MHZ memory just to see if it'll boot but I'm pretty sure it won't.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Mine came in 10 minutes ago and here is some pics. Will have to get busy and install it, have today and tomorrow off work!


----------



## Jpmboy

very cool boxing. you're gonna beat me to it... I can't get to putting this together until tomorrow evening. Are you using the Apex X?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Yes I'm going to use the Apex X. Looking at the extreme or apex XI for my next board, although if it's running great on this board, might stick. Finally going to use my new Supremacy EVO block over my old trusty oldschool EK HF.


----------



## encrypted11

Looking good! When did you guys make the order?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

I ordered last Saturday, got it today. From Newegg Canada. Bought it, then out of stock.


----------



## chibi

Nice! Mine was attempted to deliver yesterday but I wasn't home. Have to go pickup at the air port. Newegg marked the order as requiring a signature.


----------



## Jpmboy

MrTOOSHORT said:


> I ordered last Saturday, got it today. From Newegg Canada. Bought it, then out of stock.


jelly... I'm "backordered".


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Picking up a 9900k in the a.m. I'll post how it works with my Maximus X Formula. That board has a decent VRM and on my 8700k at 1.375v the VRMs stay around 60C WITHOUT water cooling while stress testing. I read about someone that got 5.2GHZ on their Z370 Formula at 1.36v. /forum/images/smilies/ph34r-smiley.gif
> 
> Edit: i'm going to try to load my 8700k BIOS settings which is 5.1 GHZ CPU, 4.9 GHZ cache, 4200 MHZ memory just to see if it'll boot but I'm pretty sure it won't. /forum/images/smilies/redface.gif


Getting 5.1 GHZ at 1.375v on my 9900k with my a Maximus X Formula motherboard but temps are a bit high stress testing, hovering around 77-80C and peaking a bit higher while running RealBench.

Good news is VRM's while running RealBench around 61C not under water. 🙂

IMC isn't as good as my 8700k but seem to be RamTest.stable at 4133 MHZ at 17-17-17-32 2T, 4x8GB.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

So it's a bit tough to oc, but this is what I got:

5GHz 1.33v load, SA and IO in bios, 1.275v and 1.25v. Ram @1.45v. Z390 Apex might be more optimized for this chip.


----------



## KedarWolf

MrTOOSHORT said:


> So it's a bit tough to oc, but this is what I got:
> 
> 5GHz 1.33v load, SA and IO in bios, 1.275v and 1.25v. Ram @1.45v. Z390 Apex might be more optimized for this chip.


You 1T timings beat my Cinebench. 5GHZ CPU 1.315v in BIOS, 4.6GHZ cache, 4100MHZ memory, SA and IO 1.25, RAM 1.45. Maximus X Formula motherboard.


----------



## Scotty99

Jpmboy said:


> could be a corrupted or unstable bios (settings). Does this happen after a CLRCMOS>


Finally got time to do a clrcmos, same **** happening lol.

The lights are on but motherboard does not show up in aura, ram works perfectly fine as it always did (gskill rgb).

Maybe im an idiot or something and installed the software wrong, there are two setup files in the zip folder for aura and ive tried the "asus setup" and regular "setup" both normally and as administrator and same results either way.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> Finally got time to do a clrcmos, same **** happening lol.
> 
> The lights are on but motherboard does not show up in aura, ram works perfectly fine as it always did (gskill rgb).
> 
> Maybe im an idiot or something and installed the software wrong, there are two setup files in the zip folder for aura and ive tried the "asus setup" and regular "setup" both normally and as administrator and same results either way.


:thinking:
that's fd-up. can you control the MB LEDs from within the bios? Color. on/off?


----------



## Scotty99

Jpmboy said:


> :thinking:
> that's fd-up. can you control the MB LEDs from within the bios? Color. on/off?


The only setting i know of in the bios is under advanced>onboard devices. Do other boards have settings to set color etc?

If i could just leave it to blue id be fine with no software control.


----------



## Jpmboy

yes, some boards have a color option in bios (rampage VI apex for example). My Apex X (1151) does not. After you did a clrcmos (and did to load a stored profile - right?) did the board's LED return to the default setting? On/On?
... plz fill out rig builder, i'm hunting back to see what board you are using.


----------



## KedarWolf

No longer any option to include your rig in your signature or am I missed something?


----------



## Scotty99

Jpmboy said:


> yes, some boards have a color option in bios (rampage VI apex for example). My Apex X (1151) does not. After you did a clrcmos (and did to load a stored profile - right?) did the board's LED return to the default setting? On/On?
> ... plz fill out rig builder, i'm hunting back to see what board you are using.


Ya what happened to rig builder i had that all filled out lol, i have the strix z370-f.

And ya it returned to on/on after the clrcmos.


----------



## chibi

KedarWolf said:


> No longer any option to include your rig in your signature or am I missed something?



Testing


Edit - yep, sig rig gone :thumbsdow


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> No longer any option to include your rig in your signature or am I missed something?





Scotty99 said:


> Ya what happened to rig builder i had that all filled out lol, i have the strix z370-f.
> 
> And ya it returned to on/on after the clrcmos.





chibi said:


> Testing
> 
> 
> Edit - yep, sig rig gone :thumbsdow



lol - yep - they are gone. who freakin knows. This forum does stuff like this and then (hopefully) these bells and whistlers reappear.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Scotty99 said:


> Finally got time to do a clrcmos, same **** happening lol.
> 
> The lights are on but motherboard does not show up in aura, ram works perfectly fine as it always did (gskill rgb).
> 
> Maybe im an idiot or something and installed the software wrong, there are two setup files in the zip folder for aura and ive tried the "asus setup" and regular "setup" both normally and as administrator and same results either way.


There are several threads on the ROG forum about the same issue. Have a look here.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101543-SOFTWARE-AURA-Sync-RGB/page28#post742107

As a last resort, you can re-flash the Aura chip, per this post by Raja from Asus. I did this on my Max X Hero wifi last December. I don't know if the files at this link are still valid. The thread is closed and has never been updated.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?94418-Aura-firmware-reflash-recovery-tool

Good luck!


----------



## KedarWolf

Before you unzip the Aura software, right click it, choose Properties, check Unblock, Apply, Okay, then unzip it. Other Asus software has issues if you don't do that.


----------



## KedarWolf

MrTOOSHORT said:


> So it's a bit tough to oc, but this is what I got:
> 
> 5GHz 1.33v load, SA and IO in bios, 1.275v and 1.25v. Ram @1.45v. Z390 Apex might be more optimized for this chip.


3rd run.


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ you are just having too much fun.
(jelly)


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> ^^ you are just having too much fun.
> (jelly)


Hope you get a good chip. Peeps are getting 5.1GHZ at 1.28v and up. I need 1.4v, and I had to up it to 1.335v at 5.0 to keep 4.6 cache stable. 'sigh'


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Here is a 5.2GHz R15 run:



Also 9900k instock this minute at newegg Canada at $750, up from $670 when I bought less than a week ago.


----------



## feznz

I would like a 9900k just really can't justify it for myself but I came across this for a little laugh


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> I would like a 9900k just really can't justify it for myself but I came across this for a little laugh


that's perfect! +1 (if I freakin could!)


----------



## chibi

Hahaha definitely rep worthy!


----------



## JMCB

Might have missed it but anyone here use a i9 9900k on a STRIX Z370-E? Was curious of the results...


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

KedarWolf said:


> Hope you get a good chip. Peeps are getting 5.1GHZ at 1.28v and up. I need 1.4v, and I had to up it to 1.335v at 5.0 to keep 4.6 cache stable. 'sigh'


Might need a z390 board to get better voltages and speeds. When I see a Gene or Apex, I'll jump on it.


----------



## Jpmboy

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Might need a z390 board to get better voltages and speeds. When I see a Gene or Apex, I'll jump on it.


I finally found a 9900K (PC Connection) IN STOCK. ships out on Monday...
Micro Center sold out in minutes after posting stock. They got 2 CPUs. Two. :wth:


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Awesome news, finally you'll get one in your hands soon.:thumb: I'm happy with mine, just want/need a z390 board now. 2080ti/titan T next.


----------



## Jpmboy

i'm really hoping we see a turing titan soon.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Interesting. I switched my 4400 CL19 kit to the 3600 CL15 kit and it seems I can get better stable memory speeds with less voltage, higher cache too. So far the 3600 kit > 4400 kit with a 9900k IMC.


----------



## KedarWolf

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Interesting. I switched my 4400 CL19 kit to the 3600 CL15 kit and it seems I can get better stable memory speeds with less voltage, higher cache too. So far the 3600 kit > 4400 kit with a 9900k IMC.


Check your CineBench scores. I can do 16-16-16-30 2T with low RTLs but get 2155 scores where with 17-17-17-32 2T with a bit higher RTLs I get 2200 scores.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

KedarWolf said:


> Check your CineBench scores. I can do 16-16-16-30 2T with low RTLs but get 2155 scores where with 17-17-17-32 2T with a bit higher RTLs I get 2200 scores.


Noticed some of that what you've said. Here is another R15 and stability run, lowered SA and IO to 1.2v and it passed.


----------



## KedarWolf

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Noticed some of that what you've said. Here is another R15 and stability run, lowered SA and IO to 1.2v and it passed.


I manually set my RTLs, bit slower than you, but I need to do 4x8GB 16-16-16-30 2T.


----------



## KedarWolf

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Noticed some of that what you've said. Here is another R15 and stability run, lowered SA and IO to 1.2v and it passed.


I reset my thermal paste on my waterblock, just loosened it some, moved it around so it was spread more evenly.

Now at 1.38v 5.1 GHZ CPU getting under 76C in RealBench and got this.


----------



## KedarWolf

Cache is AIDA64 stress stable at 4.8 GHZ.


----------



## frellingfahrbot

Any tips that would help with getting 4x16 stable at the same clocks as 2x16? I gave VCCIO and SA extra 0.05v (now at 1.1 and 1.15) without changes- memory test still fails after an hour or two. Any other settings that help specifically with the added memory sticks?

2x16 is stable at 3600 but had to drop it to 3500 after adding the sticks.. minor thing I guess but it would be nice to know if some setting change could help.


----------



## KedarWolf

frellingfahrbot said:


> Any tips that would help with getting 4x16 stable at the same clocks as 2x16? I gave VCCIO and SA extra 0.05v (now at 1.1 and 1.15) without changes- memory test still fails after an hour or two. Any other settings that help specifically with the added memory sticks?
> 
> 2x16 is stable at 3600 but had to drop it to 3500 after adding the sticks.. minor thing I guess but it would be nice to know if some setting change could help.


CPU Standby and Switching Frequencies. You had Eventual RAM voltage set too, right? Not just one on first BIOS page.

Oh, Power Phases Extreme help too.


----------



## Jpmboy

oh man... first time PC connection let me down. Ordered a 9900K last week and was "in stock". Order status now says back ordered. damn.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> oh man... first time PC connection let me down. Ordered a 9900K last week and was "in stock". Order status now says back ordered. damn.


Sorry man, I'm having so much fun with my 9900k. But had to drop it to 5.0Ghz, would get a BSOD randomly and in RealBench at 5.1, 1.38v and don't want to go higher than that. I can get 5.0 and 4.8 cache at 1.335v though RealBench stable. :h34r-smi


----------



## frellingfahrbot

KedarWolf said:


> CPU Standby and Switching Frequencies. You had Eventual RAM voltage set too, right? Not just one on first BIOS page.
> 
> Oh, Power Phases Extreme help too.


Nice! Looks like CPU Standby + manual switching frequencies did it.


----------



## nizmoz

Looking for recommendation on settings for a noobie in OCing. I have the Maximus X Code, and have a 9900k coming in. Currently have a 8700k. What has everyone been successful hitting with this? I also use a Kraken K62 AIO cooler, and RGB Trident GSKILL DDR4-3200 ram.

Also, what software do you guys recommend using to monitor, and adjust the settings? Or is it all done in the bios?


----------



## KedarWolf

nizmoz said:


> Looking for recommendation on settings for a noobie in OCing. I have the Maximus X Code, and have a 9900k coming in. Currently have a 8700k. What has everyone been successful hitting with this? I also use a Kraken K62 AIO cooler, and RGB Trident GSKILL DDR4-3200 ram.
> 
> Also, what software do you guys recommend using to monitor, and adjust the settings? Or is it all done in the bios?


brb, I'll post my 9900k BIOS settings, have the Maximus X Formula, pretty much same as the Code with a water block.


----------



## nizmoz

KedarWolf said:


> brb, I'll post my 9900k BIOS settings, have the Maximus X Formula, pretty much same as the Code with a water block.




That be awesome. Thank you.


----------



## KedarWolf

nizmoz said:


> That be awesome. Thank you.





Spoiler


----------



## nizmoz

Thank you. Let me give it a try!



KedarWolf said:


> Spoiler


----------



## nizmoz

It didn't work. It kept blue screening every time it loaded Windows. I left off your memory settings and left mine alone since we have different memory. Not sure why it was locking up though. . Maybe it was one of your settings you had in purple as those were hard to read.


----------



## Robostyle

Question about M10 LLC levels - what "Auto" really does - is it realtime LLC change depending on workload, or it just automatically chooses exact llc level once and for all, while booting?


----------



## GeneO

Robostyle said:


> Question about M10 LLC levels - what "Auto" really does - is it realtime LLC change depending on workload, or it just automatically chooses exact llc level once and for all, while booting?



Don't know, but you could use AiSuite to find out. It definitely would not be real-time.


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Question about M10 LLC levels - what "Auto" really does - is it realtime LLC change depending on workload, or it just automatically chooses exact llc level once and for all, while booting?


it sets a specific LLC level and does not adjust droop on the fly based on load AFAIK.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> it sets a specific LLC level and does not adjust droop on the fly based on load AFAIK.


On my Maximus X Formula BIOS, I flashed the latest 9900k Intel microcode.

Get the tool here https://www.win-raid.com/t154f16-Tool-Guide-News-quot-UEFI-BIOS-Updater-quot-UBU.html and expand the "e) Update of the "CPU MicroCode" modules (here: for Intel CPUs):" section to see how to do it.

It'll work on Asus Z390 BIOS's as well that are not up to date. You can check your BIOS to view the microcode for all CPU's (8700k, 8700, whatever) and it'll tell you if it's up to date. :h34r-smi


----------



## KedarWolf

Here's my BIOS settings with my 9900k on my Z370 Maximux X Formula. 5.0GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache, 4000MHZ memory, 17-17-17-32 2T 4x8GB G.Skill b-dies. It's RealBench, AIDA64 cache stress test and HCI Memtest stable. :h34r-smi



DON'T manually set the RTL's and IOL's in your BIOS as I did, leave them on Auto, without first PMing me the procedure to find them. Your PC won't boot if you don't use the right method.

Forgot the RTL's etc. but as I said, they need to be set properly or PC won't boot, leave them an Auto or PM me how to find them.

*BIOS settings you can try safely in Spoiler.*




Spoiler


























































































































































































IOL's etc. you need to PM me first below.


----------



## Jpmboy

Okay! Git my M11E and picked up a 9700K yesterday... I can not find 9900K stock, but that's fine, 8 cores w/o HT is enough. 4x8GB GS 3600c16 kit.. 2080Ti, all water cooled. Put it together today, whoa. Very quick to 5.2 avx5.0 with 1.35V in bios (1.28V under gsat load w/ LLC4 - need to adjust that. Too much droop). I have the 32GB running GSAT at 3866c16 right now.
The Max XI Extreme is an amazing board. Gonna t6ake a while to know all its features... it has a lot. I'll start a thread and post the link back here.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Can't wait to hear more!:thumb:


----------



## GAN77

How to make memory work in command-rate 1T?
Motherboard Code10.


----------



## Jpmboy

been a bad day for pc play here. But did manage this (quickly)… manually set rtls for 4000 based on 3866


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Had to reset Windows 10 after the 1809 update, tile icons went missing and it was time to reset or reinstall anyways. Put my 4400 CL19 ram back in from the 3600 CL15 sticks previous. Was able to lower some voltages on my 9900k and Apex. Happy enough with the cpu, can bench 5300MHz without issue. Maybe 5.4Ghz would be possible if I stuck my PC outside in -7'C temps. Tried the lottery again buying another 9900k, wasn't as good as this first one. So I'll sell it off. Might try the lottery again, not sure.


----------



## Jpmboy

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Had to reset Windows 10 after the 1809 update, tile icons went missing and it was time to reset or reinstall anyways. Put my 4400 CL19 ram back in from the 3600 CL15 sticks previous. Was able to lower some voltages on my 9900k and Apex. Happy enough with the cpu, can bench 5300MHz without issue. Maybe 5.4Ghz would be possible if I stuck my PC outside in -7'C temps. Tried the lottery again buying another 9900k, wasn't as good as this first one. So I'll sell it off. Might try the lottery again, not sure.


care to sell one of those "defective" parts into the US?


----------



## Robostyle

Guys, anyone having this kind of issue?? I can't force it to run fans proper the curve, idk what's the problem. 

It just stays low despite whatever temperature is being read.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Jpmboy said:


> care to sell one of those "defective" parts into the US?


I wouldn't mind. Just wouldn't send the octo case that comes with it. Too bulky. Nice to have it on the shelf though!


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Guys, anyone having this kind of issue?? I can't force it to run fans proper the curve, idk what's the problem.
> 
> It just stays low despite whatever temperature is being read.


close Ai sute, enter bios and set the fan curve from there... does it work properly via bios?


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> close Ai sute, enter bios and set the fan curve from there... does it work properly via bios?


Yep, ofc. I just want to have it all set with W_IN/OUT sensors. Qfan has those ridiculous restrictions - 75C max, no GPU diode available to set as measuring point, W_IN/W_OUT are absent aswell, while AI_Suite has a bit more functionality.
At least T_Sensor seems to be working through Qfan. 

....Enthusiast my ass - that's what asus is. Having maximus series m/b and still considering aquaero for purchase - isn't that something?


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Yep, ofc. I just want to have it all set with W_IN/OUT sensors. Qfan has those ridiculous restrictions - 75C max, no GPU diode available to set as measuring point, W_IN/W_OUT are absent aswell, while AI_Suite has a bit more functionality.
> At least T_Sensor seems to be working through Qfan.
> 
> ....Enthusiast my ass - that's what asus is. Having maximus series m/b and still considering aquaero for purchase - isn't that something?


 If you did as I recommended (and show that the fans wil lwork correctly when controlled from bios) go bac k into bios, set the q-fan control to Auto (and calibrate at least once). then back to OS and reinstall or repair your installation of AI Suite. Should work.
The CPU fan headers are linked to the CPU (of course). Other fan headers allow for other on board DTS to control the PWM.


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> If you did as I recommended (and show that the fans wil lwork correctly when controlled from bios) go bac k into bios, set the q-fan control to Auto (and calibrate at least once). then back to OS and reinstall or repair your installation of AI Suite. Should work.
> The CPU fan headers are linked to the CPU (of course). Other fan headers allow for other on board DTS to control the PWM.


I had them all calibrated already, before installing AI Suite. Moreover, I've tried reinstalling it 3 times, I've tried newer version from XI Hero resourses aswell, just in case - it's all the same. 
Or do You mean I need to repeat this loop again, in order....to catch out some kind of bug? 

P.S. I've meant W_PUMP/AIO_PUMP headers. Ofc CPU fans should be strictly related to CPU temp. But pumps..


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> I had them all calibrated already, before installing AI Suite. Moreover, I've tried reinstalling it 3 times, I've tried newer version from XI Hero resourses aswell, just in case - it's all the same.
> Or do You mean I need to repeat this loop again, in order....to catch out some kind of bug?
> 
> P.S. I've meant W_PUMP/AIO_PUMP headers. Ofc CPU fans should be strictly related to CPU temp. But pumps..


set the bios fan controls to auto before trying ai suite. that's what I mean.


----------



## Robostyle

Ok, I'll try it out


----------



## Robostyle

So, I’ve doublechecked all again - fans are working properly via Qfan, fast response, everything is normal.

I’ve applied the following settings:
Control:Auto
Source:CPU
Speed steps are set to 0 sec
Low limit Ignore
Profile Standard

To all fan connectors ( o matter used or not), just in order to avoid any possible software conflict.
I’ve also removed suite before changing any Qfan settings, and reinstalled it.

Aaand - it didn’t worked. Fans just won’t go past the lowest curve point. I’ ve tried both “untuned” and “tuned” through Ai Suite fans, no difference at all. I’ve even tried setting multiple sensors, leaving two strings blank. IDK, it seems like some flaw between W_IN/OUT sensors and Suite. Seems like I Have to use T_sensor instead - not that eye candy while monitoring though :/


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> So, I’ve doublechecked all again - fans are working properly via Qfan, fast response, everything is normal.
> 
> I’ve applied the following settings:
> Control:Auto
> Source:CPU
> Speed steps are set to 0 sec
> Low limit Ignore
> Profile Standard
> 
> To all fan connectors ( o matter used or not), just in order to avoid any possible software conflict.
> I’ve also removed suite before changing any Qfan settings, and reinstalled it.
> 
> Aaand - it didn’t worked. Fans just won’t go past the lowest curve point. I’ ve tried both “untuned” and “tuned” through Ai Suite fans, no difference at all. I’ve even tried setting multiple sensors, leaving two strings blank. IDK, it seems like some flaw between W_IN/OUT sensors and Suite. Seems like I Have to use T_sensor instead - not that eye candy while monitoring though :/


Fan control to standard or AUTO?


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> Fan control to standard or AUTO?


Fan control to AUTO - not pwm, neither dc. It is speed profile that is set to standard.



Spoiler


----------



## Pragzor

Guys quick question, if my bios looks somethings like this running IGPU via HDMI port - is that a faulty CPU or Board?
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4878/31004730937_93d58c7b51_c.jpg


----------



## Jpmboy

Pragzor said:


> Guys quick question, if my bios looks somethings like this running IGPU via HDMI port - is that a faulty CPU or Board?
> https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4878/31004730937_93d58c7b51_c.jpg


 yes, or cable.
have you cleared cmos, disconnected AC power before inserting the HDMI cable in the MB?


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Fan control to AUTO - not pwm, neither dc. It is speed profile that is set to standard.


okay - if it won't work as such from AI suite... time to upgrade.  Kidding, somewhat. the pics below are from the Max XI Extreme.
BTW - why would you expect to have GPU temp in bios? Are you running an ASUS card?


----------



## Pragzor

Jpmboy said:


> yes, or cable.
> have you cleared cmos, disconnected AC power before inserting the HDMI cable in the MB?


Yes I've tried literally everything - cmos, ram in different slots, updating bios. Same cable works fine with dedicated GPU. But now I'm also getting constant white VGA led even in windows. I just really hope my CPU didn't get damaged.


----------



## Robostyle

Yes, I have Strix 1080 Ti running.

Hm, I need someone with M10H to check if it is overall motherboard’s drawback or only mine’s...

P.S. I dunno - maybe I should turn smth on before choosing temp sensors? 








Despite having Strix GPU and G.Skill sticks with precise temperature sensors, I have only THIS variants to choose. It does read those temps though.


----------



## Jpmboy

Pragzor said:


> Yes I've tried literally everything - cmos, ram in different slots, updating bios. Same cable works fine with dedicated GPU. But now I'm also getting constant white VGA led even in windows. I just really hope my CPU didn't get damaged.


the video engine is the cpu... the problem is likely the CPU.


----------



## scracy

Stupid question time how do I save a UEFI profile settings as a .TXT file using Maximus X Formula? I know it can be done but I cannot remember how


----------



## Jpmboy

scracy said:


> Stupid question time how do I save a UEFI profile settings as a .TXT file using Maximus X Formula? I know it can be done but I cannot remember how


usb stick in any port, nav to the stick on the bios profiles page. ctrl-F2.


----------



## scracy

Jpmboy said:


> usb stick in any port, nav to the stick on the bios profiles page. ctrl-F2.


I thought that only creates a .cmo file?


----------



## Jpmboy

scracy said:


> I thought that only creates a .cmo file?


instructions are at the bottom of the bios screen...


----------



## KedarWolf

Welp, if I plugged a monitor into my integrated graphics on my old 8700k it would crash my system with using my 1080 Ti for display port, but on my 9900k it works just fine, now my 1080 Ti can be totally dedicated to gaming.


----------



## Lownage

I have a problem with my rtl and iol training on my X Apex.

UEFI Version: 1704
CPU: 8700k
Memory: Gskill F4-3600C15D-16GTZ

I tested a 9900k and replaced it with my original 8700k.

I was able to run 4266 19 19 19 38 @ 1,4V Dram, SA/IO @ 1,275V

RTL were running at 67/68 and iol at 7.

Now my memory won´t train correctly and sit at 74/74 14/14. 

MRC Fastboot is off. I tried enabling "Early Command Training" which didn´t help either.

Tried the following aswell: Bios Flashback, loaded my old profile which worked, reseated memory, tried tweak mode 1 and 2.

edit: even at 3600 15 15 15 35 my rtl and iol won´t train correctly. They will stay above 60 which is way too high...


----------



## Jpmboy

did you update the mbb, chipset and ME drivers for the 9900K


----------



## Lownage

I only tested the 9900k. It was an awful overclocker so I replaced it again with my old 8700k. After that memory training wasn´t correct.


What is "mbb"? I didn´t update any drivers in the OS.

Going to try and old bios (1401).


----------



## Jpmboy

Lownage said:


> I only tested the 9900k. It was an awful overclocker so I replaced it again with my old 8700k. After that memory training wasn´t correct.
> 
> 
> What is "mbb"? I didn´t update any drivers in the OS.
> 
> Going to try and old bios (1401).


 it's a typo.. MB (motherboard... eg chipset) Update INtel ME with the new version for 9th gen?


----------



## Starbuck5000

Has anyone here had any experience with the XI Code? I was looking at the XI Hero but it has barely any USB Ports so I'm weighing up buying a USB PCIe card vs splashing for the Code but trying to figure out what the code offers in actual proper features over the hero.


----------



## Jpmboy

"proper" features? I think you spotted the difference besides the iGPU DP port on the Hero.


----------



## Wihglah

What's the general opinion on LLC 7 on a Formula XI?

I am getting yuge vdroop at LLC6.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wihglah said:


> What's the general opinion on LLC 7 on a Formula XI?
> 
> I am getting yuge vdroop at LLC6.


This is intended.
Maximus XI boards have improved voltage monitoring.

Read.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html

Gigabyte boards can access this more accurate value via the VR VOUT sensor on the IR 35201 sensor.


----------



## Wihglah

Falkentyne said:


> This is intended.
> Maximus XI boards have improved voltage monitoring.
> 
> Read.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
> 
> Gigabyte boards can access this more accurate value via the VR VOUT sensor on the IR 35201 sensor.


Yeah but I can reduce the idle voltage if I increase the LLC.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wihglah said:


> Yeah but I can reduce the idle voltage if I increase the LLC.


Huh? What?
How does increasing the LLC reduce the idle voltage?
The idle voltage should remain the same. Or are you not explaining something or leaving something out of your explanation?


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Huh? What?
> How does increasing the LLC reduce the idle voltage?
> The idle voltage should remain the same. Or are you not explaining something or leaving something out of your explanation?



The BIOS additional adaptive voltage needs to be higher for lower LLC in order to provide sufficient vcore at load after droop to be stable. With a higher LLC, the BIOS voltage does not need to be as high to get a stable vcore at load since there is less droop, so the idle vcore, ~ BIOS voltage, is less.


And idle voltage is probably not what he meant since with power savings state that will be low. It is the voltage at lower loads, like browsing or watching videos, that will be less with higher LLC.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> The BIOS additional adaptive voltage needs to be higher for lower LLC in order to provide sufficient vcore at load to be stable. With a higher LLC, the BIOS voltage does not need to be as high to get a stable vcore at load, so the idle vcore, ~ BIOS voltage, is less


Ok that makes sense. then why doesn't everyone (since its been proven that negative loadline calibration is impossible, regardless of what the non Maximus XI (or other ODMs) Vcore sensors tell you) simply use the highest level of loadline calibration with a lower bios voltage then?

If vdroop stops overshoot from transient load/idle/load spikes (that can only be measured on an oscilloscope), how is setting 1.3v bios for 1.20v max load voltage with medium LLC (assuming your CPU must have 1.20v for stability) any different, transient spike wise, from setting 1.20v bios, 1.20v true load with maximum LLC?

How exactly does this cause possible 'risk' from transient voltage spikes?
@elmor ?


----------



## Cypther

I got my Asus ROG Maximus XI Extreme Z390 today, I'm trying to get the XMP profile to work on the motherboard, but anything over 3600Mhz, the system won't post, it will start up, than shut down, does this 3 times and post again saying "Overclock failed in Safe mode". My G.Skill ram does 3866Mhz XMP no problem on my Asus Apex x without any problems and I got it as high as 4133Mhz. 


I'm using the same CPU as before the 9900k on my Apex X and same ram. Now I can't get anything over 3600Mhz on the Asus ROG Maximus XI Extreme to work. 

On my Asus Apex x, 3866Mhz XMP works with CPU VCCIO at 1.0 voltage, 1.1 voltage System Agent Voltage on Tweak Mode 1. 

I tried the same settings as the Apex on the Extreme as well, but it doesn't work.

These are what I tried so far on the Asus ROG Maximus XI Extreme:

Update the the newest bios 0602:
increase CPU VCCIO Voltage to 1.2V 
increase CPU System Agent Voltage to 1.25V 
disable MCH full check
Tried Tweak Mode 1 and Tweak Mode 2

As ram are placed in A2 and B2 slot.

any ideas why the ram won't post over 3600Mhz or work on the Asus ROG Maximus XI Extreme above that speed?


----------



## Falkentyne

Cypther said:


> I got my Asus ROG Maximus XI Extreme Z390 today, I'm trying to get the XMP profile to work on the motherboard, but anything over 3600Mhz, the system won't post, it will start up, than shut down, does this 3 times and post again saying "Overclock failed in Safe mode". My G.Skill ram does 3866Mhz XMP no problem on my Asus Apex x without any problems and I got it as high as 4133Mhz.
> 
> 
> I'm using the same CPU as before the 9900k on my Apex X and same ram. Now I can't get anything over 3600Mhz on the Asus ROG Maximus XI Extreme to work.
> 
> On my Asus Apex x, 3866Mhz XMP works with CPU VCCIO at 1.0 voltage, 1.1 voltage System Agent Voltage on Tweak Mode 1.
> 
> I tried the same settings as the Apex on the Extreme as well, but it doesn't work.
> 
> These are what I tried so far on the Asus ROG Maximus XI Extreme:
> 
> Update the the newest bios 0602:
> increase CPU VCCIO Voltage to 1.2V
> increase CPU System Agent Voltage to 1.25V
> disable MCH full check
> Tried Tweak Mode 1 and Tweak Mode 2
> 
> any ideas why the ram won't post over 3600Mhz or work on the Asus ROG Maximus XI Extreme above that speed?


Is this 2x8 GB, 4x8 GB or 2x16 GB of RAM? If these are 2x16 GB, are these b-die sticks with the first 3 timings the same?


----------



## Cypther

Falkentyne said:


> Is this 2x8 GB, 4x8 GB or 2x16 GB of RAM? If these are 2x16 GB, are these b-die sticks with the first 3 timings the same?


G.Skill Trident Z RGB F4-3866C

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3866c18d-32gtzr

It's 2x16GB 3866MHz	18-18-18-38


----------



## Falkentyne

Cypther said:


> G.Skill Trident Z RGB F4-3866C
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3866c18d-32gtzr
> 
> It's 2x16GB


I'm not sure but I don't know if the 2x16 GB b-die sticks will work at high frequencies. Everyone's been using the 2x8GB sticks.
I have these.

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c14d-32gtzr

I haven't done too much with the DDR voltage, but 3466 mhz @ 15/15/15/36 worked. But that's not going to do much more than 3200 @ 14/14/14/34.
3466 mhz @ 14/14/14/34 just gave 5 long beeps and the system booted at failsafe defaults.
3600 mhz @ 15/15/15/36 didn't beep but it booted at 3200 mhz at 15/15/15/36 :/
Anything higher (Only thing I remember trying once was 4000 mhz 17/17/17/39 @ 1.40v) = 5 beeps and boots to failsafe.

From what little I read, the 2x16GB sticks use a different PCB and double sided and won't overclock anywhere near the 2x8 GB sticks. I'm new to memory and can't help with this.

So I gave up and just set the Command rate to 1T at 3200 mhz stock, tightened the tRFC to 270 and increased tREFI to 32767. Got me a nice boost in bandwidth and a nice drop in latency.


----------



## Wihglah

Falkentyne said:


> Huh? What?
> How does increasing the LLC reduce the idle voltage?
> The idle voltage should remain the same. Or are you not explaining something or leaving something out of your explanation?



LLC6:


vcore at idle is 1.208
vcore under load is 1.142

LLC7:

vcore at idle is 1.181 <<<<<lower
vcore under load is 1.142


vcore is set manually.


----------



## Cypther

Falkentyne said:


> I'm not sure but I don't know if the 2x16 GB b-die sticks will work at high frequencies. Everyone's been using the 2x8GB sticks.
> I have these.
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c14d-32gtzr
> 
> I haven't done too much with the DDR voltage, but 3466 mhz @ 15/15/15/36 worked. But that's not going to do much more than 3200 @ 14/14/14/34.
> 3466 mhz @ 14/14/14/34 just gave 5 long beeps and the system booted at failsafe defaults.
> 3600 mhz @ 15/15/15/36 didn't beep but it booted at 3200 mhz at 15/15/15/36 :/
> Anything higher (Only thing I remember trying once was 4000 mhz 17/17/17/39 @ 1.40v) = 5 beeps and boots to failsafe.
> 
> From what little I read, the 2x16GB sticks use a different PCB and double sided and won't overclock anywhere near the 2x8 GB sticks. I'm new to memory and can't help with this.
> 
> So I gave up and just set the Command rate to 1T at 3200 mhz stock, tightened the tRFC to 270 and increased tREFI to 32767. Got me a nice boost in bandwidth and a nice drop in latency.


But why would 3866Mhz work on the Apex X but not the XI Extreme, same everything as before, CPU, ram, power supply, cooler, M.2 and video card?


----------



## Falkentyne

Cypther said:


> But why would 3866Mhz work on the Apex X but not the XI Extreme, same everything as before, CPU, ram, power supply, cooler, M.2 and video card?


I don't know. I have an Aorus Master. So I figure I'm having the same issue. (or a similar and possibly related issue).
I assume I could get 3600mhz to work at cas 16-16-16-38, but that's simply not worth it because of the latency increase compared to 3200 14-14-14-34.
I'm totally new to this sort of stuff. But I can only assume they are related even though we have different motherboards but same chipset.


----------



## Dillmiester

Cypther said:


> I got my Asus ROG Maximus XI Extreme Z390 today, I'm trying to get the XMP profile to work on the motherboard, but anything over 3600Mhz, the system won't post, it will start up, than shut down, does this 3 times and post again saying "Overclock failed in Safe mode". My G.Skill ram does 3866Mhz XMP no problem on my Asus Apex x without any problems and I got it as high as 4133Mhz.
> 
> 
> I'm using the same CPU as before the 9900k on my Apex X and same ram. Now I can't get anything over 3600Mhz on the Asus ROG Maximus XI Extreme to work.
> 
> On my Asus Apex x, 3866Mhz XMP works with CPU VCCIO at 1.0 voltage, 1.1 voltage System Agent Voltage on Tweak Mode 1.
> 
> I tried the same settings as the Apex on the Extreme as well, but it doesn't work.
> 
> These are what I tried so far on the Asus ROG Maximus XI Extreme:
> 
> Update the the newest bios 0602:
> increase CPU VCCIO Voltage to 1.2V
> increase CPU System Agent Voltage to 1.25V
> disable MCH full check
> Tried Tweak Mode 1 and Tweak Mode 2
> 
> As ram are placed in A2 and B2 slot.
> 
> any ideas why the ram won't post over 3600Mhz or work on the Asus ROG Maximus XI Extreme above that speed?


What is your Dram Voltage?


----------



## Cypther

Dillmiester said:


> What is your Dram Voltage?


1.35 Voltage, same on the Apex and that's the default XMP voltage for 3866Mhz for this G.Skill Memory kit


----------



## Dillmiester

Cypther said:


> 1.35 Voltage, same on the Apex and that's the default XMP voltage for 3866Mhz for this G.Skill Memory kit


Just wondering cause my freinds xi hero defaults to 1.2v on a pair of 3600 tridents.


----------



## Jpmboy

Dillmiester said:


> Just wondering cause my freinds xi hero defaults to 1.2v on a pair of 3600 tridents.


look at the CPUZ SPD tab... the voltage for the XMP profile(s) is listed.


----------



## Dillmiester

Jpmboy said:


> look at the CPUZ SPD tab... the voltage for the XMP profile(s) is listed.


Thats what it defaulted to on first boot, or whenever the cmos is cleared. I didnt use XMP the sticks are suppose to use 1.35 at 3600 but it defaults to 2133 if you dont manually set the frequency. 

So if you were to bump the frequency up it doesn't automatically raise in relation.


----------



## mackanz

Dillmiester said:


> Thats what it defaulted to on first boot, or whenever the cmos is cleared. I didnt use XMP the sticks are suppose to use 1.35 at 3600 but it defaults to 2133 if you dont manually set the frequency.
> 
> So if you were to bump the frequency up it doesn't automatically raise in relation.



That is what the XMP II is for. It sorts out the programmed timings and vdimm. It may not always be correct though, hence it is often better to set timings and voltage manually. My pair of 3600 Gskill won't be stable with XMP II at 3600, but they are stable at 4133 mhz with manual settings AND higher voltage. B-die have no problems with 1.45 volts.


----------



## Jpmboy

Dillmiester said:


> Thats what it defaulted to on first boot, or whenever the cmos is cleared. I didnt use XMP the sticks are suppose to use 1.35 at 3600 but it defaults to 2133 if you dont manually set the frequency.
> 
> So if you were to bump the frequency up it doesn't automatically raise in relation.


yep - as I thoughtg. the default (SPD) is 1.2V and 2133. unless you enable XMP or manually enter values, you'll get that every time. I advise you to do some reading on basic overclocking before doing anything. See the guide in th4e OP of this thread (page 1).


----------



## Dillmiester

mackanz said:


> That is what the XMP II is for. It sorts out the programmed timings and vdimm. It may not always be correct though, hence it is often better to set timings and voltage manually. My pair of 3600 Gskill won't be stable with XMP II at 3600, but they are stable at 4133 mhz with manual settings AND higher voltage. B-die have no problems with 1.45 volts.



Yea it seems to cause more trouble than it worth, the board does a decent job (with XMP off) but will set them very tight even when upping the frequency past what you manually set is your sticks normal operating frequency, its like it almost keeps the same timings as at 2133 but Im pretty sure they changed, just not loose enough during my initial testing I just set it to 1.4v.

Now I have them set at 4000 1.47v I think used the RAW frequency preset and tweaked it myself from there.


----------



## Dillmiester

Jpmboy said:


> yep - as I thoughtg. the default (SPD) is 1.2V and 2133. unless you enable XMP or manually enter values, you'll get that every time. I advise you to do some reading on basic overclocking before doing anything. See the guide in th4e OP of this thread (page 1).


Actually the ram always should have a table for default frequency, timings, and voltage without XMP, unless something has changed.

I think what you do not realize is that the 9x00 chips actually only officially supports 2133mhz on the ram.


----------



## Jpmboy

Dillmiester said:


> Actually the ram always should have a table for default frequency, timings, and voltage without XMP, unless something has changed.
> 
> I think what you do not realize is that the 9x00 chips actually only officially supports 2133mhz on the ram.


 wut don't I realize? :doh:
Again, read the OC guide in the OP which is the first post in this thread... in case you do not realize that.


----------



## Dillmiester

"yep - as I thoughtg. the default (SPD) is 1.2V and 2133"

Yea where is it getting that value from?


*Edit
It still should have a default timing table and voltage for its rated specification.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Ok that makes sense. then why doesn't everyone (since its been proven that negative loadline calibration is impossible, regardless of what the non Maximus XI (or other ODMs) Vcore sensors tell you) simply use the highest level of loadline calibration with a lower bios voltage then?
> 
> If vdroop stops overshoot from transient load/idle/load spikes (that can only be measured on an oscilloscope), how is setting 1.3v bios for 1.20v max load voltage with medium LLC (assuming your CPU must have 1.20v for stability) any different, transient spike wise, from setting 1.20v bios, 1.20v true load with maximum LLC?
> 
> How exactly does this cause possible 'risk' from transient voltage spikes?
> 
> @*elmor* ?



I would like to hear an explanation of that myself. I don't get it either.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> I would like to hear an explanation of that myself. I don't get it either.


Elmor replied in PM. Basically the tighter the vcore is to idle/load (closer to 0 mOhm loadline) the larger the transient spikes can be. Spikes happen because the circuitry is still outputting power when the load suddenly stops and without vdroop, the board doesn't have time to compensate, so the voltage shoots up. With vdroop, the rise up will be smaller and more relaxed. 

Something like that.


----------



## Starbuck5000

Jpmboy said:


> "proper" features? I think you spotted the difference besides the iGPU DP port on the Hero.


Well I was thinking non-gimmicky improvements, like better VRM's more overclocking features etc...

As far as I can tell the Mobo's are 99% the same just the code has more headers and USB ports thanks to the ASMedia controller?

Finding the comparison part of the ROG site not very helpful!


----------



## Jpmboy

Starbuck5000 said:


> Well I was thinking non-gimmicky improvements, like better VRM's more overclocking features etc...
> 
> As far as I can tell the Mobo's are 99% the same just the code has more headers and USB ports thanks to the ASMedia controller?
> 
> Finding the comparison part of the ROG site not very helpful!


check OCN for the VRM discussion thread...


----------



## Frutek

Friend of mine recently bought new PC parts (i9-9900k and Z390 Hero), but he has some problems with overclocking his cpu. I tried to help him but I kinda got clueless what can be a problem. Only thing that seemed strange is that he has huge vdrop even on high LLC - 7. For example his voltage readout is around 1.32V when it's set to 1.38V with adaptive volt. With Manual Voltage control set to 1.35V it doesn't even reach 1.3V. Could it be bios problem or should we look elsewhere?


----------



## Falkentyne

Frutek said:


> Friend of mine recently bought new PC parts (i9-9900k and Z390 Hero), but he has some problems with overclocking his cpu. I tried to help him but I kinda got clueless what can be a problem. Only thing that seemed strange is that he has huge vdrop even on high LLC - 7. For example his voltage readout is around 1.32V when it's set to 1.38V with adaptive volt. With Manual Voltage control set to 1.35V it doesn't even reach 1.3V. Could it be bios problem or should we look elsewhere?


This is normal. You will have substantial vdroop up to the highest LLC, which should NOT be used.
The vdroop is reporting high because it's been recalibrated to match the CPU on-die voltage sense, as compared to 'traditional' sensors, which would report no vdroop, or even "Vrise" at LLC6 or 7.

Read:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html


----------



## Wihglah

Frutek said:


> Friend of mine recently bought new PC parts (i9-9900k and Z390 Hero), but he has some problems with overclocking his cpu. I tried to help him but I kinda got clueless what can be a problem. Only thing that seemed strange is that he has huge vdrop even on high LLC - 7. For example his voltage readout is around 1.32V when it's set to 1.38V with adaptive volt. With Manual Voltage control set to 1.35V it doesn't even reach 1.3V. Could it be bios problem or should we look elsewhere?




You should know that Asus boards are reporting the vcore about 100mV less than the other brands.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wihglah said:


> You should know that Asus boards are reporting the vcore about 100mV less than the other brands.


Yes.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html


----------



## Jpmboy

isn't manual mode niice! 


(thanks to Elmor for clarifying this!)


----------



## Scotty99

So i think i fixed the lights (knock on wood) on my z370-f. I pulled my system apart entirely just to remove the io cover and sure enough when i pressed on the connector from the light switch to the board there was a small click as if it wasnt inserted entirely, boot my system up and i now see my board in aura software. To be fair an unplugging of my PC has made the mobo show up in software as well, but here is to hoping this is a perma fix lol.

I think ive seen others with this same issue, thats some pretty yikers QC from asus.


----------



## Hothicron

So what's the word on the Z390 PRIME mobo? I'm thinking of a 9700k build which is likely gonna be my last gaming rig for a long time and I won't be overclocking it so prevent breaking it for longevity reasons. Will the VRMs hold up ok well air cooled setup in a modified Phanteks Evolv atx with upgraded 140mm fans?


----------



## Jpmboy

even overclocked, the board will hold up fine.


----------



## ITAngel

I cannot wait order my ASUS ROG Maximus XI Formula Z390 with a 9900K to drop into my EK loop with a cuplex kryos NEXT VARIO with VISION water block for the processor. Quick question. Does the Formula have a way to see VRM temperatures?


----------



## Jpmboy

ITAngel said:


> I cannot wait order my ASUS ROG Maximus XI Formula Z390 with a 9900K to drop into my EK loop with a cuplex kryos NEXT VARIO with VISION water block for the processor. Quick question. Does the Formula have a way to see VRM temperatures?


the vrms are water cooled - right?


----------



## ITAngel

Jpmboy said:


> the vrms are water cooled - right?


Yup they should be since they have a EK VRM water block. I was just curious if they also had a temp monitor software for it like the cpu and such.


----------



## Robostyle

Falkentyne said:


> This is intended.
> Maximus XI boards have improved voltage monitoring.
> 
> Read.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
> 
> Gigabyte boards can access this more accurate value via the VR VOUT sensor on the IR 35201 sensor.


Still don't get it....does it mean, all other boards ATM show overshoot by 0.1v? Does that mean, 8700K that was capable of [email protected], is actually 1.2v silicon?


----------



## Falkentyne

Robostyle said:


> Still don't get it....does it mean, all other boards ATM show overshoot by 0.1v? Does that mean, 8700K that was capable of [email protected], is actually 1.2v silicon?


Yes exactly, but you can't say all are overreading by the same value because it has everything to do with how the board is designed and where the read points are. When using LLC at the highest 1 or 2 levels (depending on board), all boards in the past were showing overshoot sustained at full load, which is impossible because you can NOT have a negative loadline slope. The most you can get is a flat slope at 0 mOhm loadlines.

It's obvious if you know Ohm's law.
mv= Amps * resistance.
Based on 100 amps:
100 * 0 mOhms=0 mv.
default loadline calibration setting (1.80 mOhms):
100 amps:
100 * 1.80=180mv (180 mv droop at full load at 100 amps of current).

I actually finished a few tests with LLC Turbo (vcore sensor reads same voltage at idle and load, but VR VOUT ("true" voltage, aka CPU on-die sense, reads much loewr), and LLC Extreme (not Ultra Extreme except in 1 test).

0 mOhms LLC should not be used because the problem of high transient overshoots (you need an oscilloscope to see this) are much greater without vdroop.

4.7 ghz HT Off, llc high: bios 1.200v

(TS= throttlestop 8.70 reading CPU package power)
vrvout 1.193v, vcore 1.188v idle
vrvout 1.174v, vcore 1.188v load (No AVX), watts 77.500, amps 67.250A, TS 87.6W
vrvout 1.168v, vcore 1.188v (FMA3) watts 100.5W, amps 87.650, TS 115.0

4.7 ghz HT Off llcextreme bios: 1.200v
vrvout 1.197v, vcore 1.199v idle
vrvout 1.186v, vcore 1.199v-1.210v load (No AVX), Watts:80.000, amps 68.250A, TS 89.4W
vrvout 1.180v, vcore 1.199v-1.210v load (FMA3), watts 102.500, amps 87.250A (TS:115W)

4.7ghz HT Off llcultraextreme bios 1.180v
vrvout 1.180v, vcore 1.188v idle
vrvout 1.180v, vcore 1.199v (No AVX), watts 79.500, amps 67.750A, TS 88.6W
vrvout 1.180v, vcore 1.210v load (FMA3), watts 102.500, amps 87.250A, TS 115.5W

5.1 ghz 1.335v bios, LLC Turbo
vrvout 1.326v, vcore 1.331v idle
vrvout 1.273v, vcore 1.331v (no avx), watts 200.5W, amps 159.250v TS 209W
1344K FFT AVX: VRVOUT 1.287v, watts 158W, amps 123.5A

5.1 ghz HT On, 1.315 bios, LLC Extreme
vrvout 1.311v, vcore 1.309v idle
vrvout 1.277v, vcore 1.342v (no avx), watts 208, amps 163.250A, TS 216W

5.1 ghz, HT On 1.310v bios, LLC Extreme
vrvout 1.305v, vcore 1.309v idle
vrvout 1.273v, vcore 1.331v (no avx), watts 202W, amps 159.250A, TS 210W
vrvout 1.281v, vcore 1.331v (avx 1344K FFT), watts 158W, amps 124A, 


The key here was getting VR VOUT to match similar amps/watts.


----------



## Jpmboy

ITAngel said:


> Yup they should be since they have a EK VRM water block. I was just curious if they also had a temp monitor software for it like the cpu and such.


Sorry, I do not know. I do know that the Max XI Extreme does... I suspect all ROG boards do. The point about the water block is... you need not worry. Aircooled, the M11E vrms barely hit 50C with my chip at 5.3GHz.


----------



## binormalkilla

ITAngel said:


> I cannot wait order my ASUS ROG Maximus XI Formula Z390 with a 9900K to drop into my EK loop with a cuplex kryos NEXT VARIO with VISION water block for the processor. Quick question. Does the Formula have a way to see VRM temperatures?


Yes, HWINFO64 and AIDA64 both display the VRM temps on this board.


----------



## drfouad

So I had received my Asus Maximus XI code and 9900k cpu, the bios would not post at all. I tried troubleshooting the components and still with mobo and cpu alone and 1 module my ram....nothing.
Rma and just received the replacement today. Still a no go. Spoke to Asus for help, got senior tech to help for an hour. Boards defective. What are the odds? Twice?
Am I doing something wrong?
I installed my z270 and 7700k and it’s up and running.
I don’t get it. Did I miss something?


----------



## Falkentyne

drfouad said:


> So I had received my Asus Maximus XI code and 9900k cpu, the bios would not post at all. I tried troubleshooting the components and still with mobo and cpu alone and 1 module my ram....nothing.
> Rma and just received the replacement today. Still a no go. Spoke to Asus for help, got senior tech to help for an hour. Boards defective. What are the odds? Twice?
> Am I doing something wrong?
> I installed my z270 and 7700k and it’s up and running.
> I don’t get it. Did I miss something?


Did you consider that the CPU could be dead? Very rare but still possible.
See if there's any place or shop around you that can test your CPU if you have access to it. Otherwise it gets messy.
Sucks when parts don't work. I'm sorry


----------



## KedarWolf

Try this to see if your overclock is really stable.

Get the latest Prime95.

For an 8700k/8086k or 9700k/9900k add this code to the bottom of your local.txt file to disable AVX etc. and enable SSE and SSE2. Have 0 AVX Offset in BIOS. Then have HWInfo open Sensors Only WITHOUT enabling the ASUS EC. Run Prime95 on Blend. Be sure you're under 80C CPU core and CPU package, and watch at the bottom to see if you get any WHEA errors. 

Try it with RealBench as well. If you don't get WHEA errors within 30 minutes or so you can be pretty sure your CPU and/or memory overclock is stable. 

BTW, I read you'll need more voltage to be AVX stable with AVX Offsets in BIOS then you will using no AVX in Prime95 or just RealBench. Asus even admitted it takes more voltage to be AVX Offset stable than without.

With Linpack Xtreme I need my CPU at 1.38v to be residuals stable with an AVX offset of 5. With Prime95 no AVX and Realbench I'm 100% stable at 1.345v with no AVX offset and Realbench does use AVX, just not in an extreme way like Prime95 AVX enabled or Linpack. :h34r-smi



Code:


CpuSupportsAVX=0 
CpuSupportsAVX2=0 
CpuSupportsAVX512F=0
CpuSupportsFMA3=0 
CpuSupportsFMA4=0 
CpuSupportsSSE=1
CpuSupportsSSE2=1


----------



## tatmMRKIV

Whats this new silicon quality feature on these boards? Is it any real indication of chip quality? I mean id live to believe my 9900k is 104% sil quality and capable of 5.4xx(some god awful number)ghz, but needless to say, after the gimmicks they put out over the years, am sceptical.


Also heads up. The front plate on the formula and probably code prevent gpus with PHATTY HS from properly mounting to your case. Atleast in my case with my lianli 011 dynamic and evga rtx 2080 ti ftw3 

I wish OC formulas were still a thing... man spending 250 max for a premium OC board was the best


----------



## elmor

tatmMRKIV said:


> Whats this new silicon quality feature on these boards? Is it any real indication of chip quality? I mean id live to believe my 9900k is 104% sil quality and capable of 5.4xx(some god awful number)ghz, but needless to say, after the gimmicks they put out over the years, am sceptical.
> 
> 
> Also heads up. The front plate on the formula and probably code prevent gpus with PHATTY HS from properly mounting to your case. Atleast in my case with my lianli 011 dynamic and evga rtx 2080 ti ftw3
> 
> I wish OC formulas were still a thing... man spending 250 max for a premium OC board was the best


"Sil. quality" or on later BIOS version "Setup Parameter" which is silicon quality*2, gives a good indication. It's similar to rating chips based on VID. The frequency suggestions you get won't be good until your system has collected enough power/temperature data, which is stored as "Cooler points".


----------



## SpeedyIV

KedarWolf said:


> Try this to see if your overclock is really stable.
> 
> Get the latest Prime95.
> 
> For an 8700k/8086k or 9700k/9900k add this code to the bottom of your local.txt file to disable AVX etc. and enable SSE and SSE2. Have 0 AVX Offset in BIOS. Then have HWInfo open Sensors Only WITHOUT enabling the ASUS EC. Run Prime95 on Blend. Be sure you're under 80C CPU core and CPU package, and watch at the bottom to see if you get any WHEA errors.
> 
> Try it with RealBench as well. If you don't get WHEA errors within 30 minutes or so you can be pretty sure your CPU and/or memory overclock is stable.
> 
> BTW, I read you'll need more voltage to be AVX stable with AVX Offsets in BIOS then you will using no AVX in Prime95 or just RealBench. Asus even admitted it takes more voltage to be AVX Offset stable than without.
> 
> With Linpack Xtreme I need my CPU at 1.38v to be residuals stable with an AVX offset of 5. With Prime95 no AVX and Realbench I'm 100% stable at 1.345v with no AVX offset and Realbench does use AVX, just not in an extreme way like Prime95 AVX enabled or Linpack. :h34r-smi
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> CpuSupportsAVX=0
> CpuSupportsAVX2=0
> CpuSupportsAVX512F=0
> CpuSupportsFMA3=0
> CpuSupportsFMA4=0
> CpuSupportsSSE=1
> CpuSupportsSSE2=1


Makes sense but why is it important to leave Asus EC reporting disabled?


----------



## tatmMRKIV

Feel free to elaborate but I think it can lead to instability. I use hwinfo64 n it says if you dont disable monitoring it, it can cause instability.


----------



## SpeedyIV

tatmMRKIV said:


> Feel free to elaborate but I think it can lead to instability. I use hwinfo64 n it says if you dont disable monitoring it, it can cause instability.


OK I can see that. Polling the Asus EC buss data does add some load to the system. I think the big no no is to not have 2 monitoring utilities both trying to poll it at the same time.


----------



## Jpmboy

SpeedyIV said:


> OK I can see that. Polling the Asus EC buss data does add some load to the system. I think the big no no is to not have 2 monitoring utilities both trying to poll it at the same time.


it's not just added load in my experience. there's something else going on and it happens with AID64 also.


----------



## tatmMRKIV

I would also like to add that the message didnt show up on the code mobo, and that hwinfo reported approx .08v less than cpuid with this mobo, but not with the formula. 

Anyone know the specific differences between code and formula other than block n backplate and code doesnt have an aquatina


----------



## ITAngel

binormalkilla said:


> Yes, HWINFO64 and AIDA64 both display the VRM temps on this board.


Okay great thanks!


----------



## drfouad

Falkentyne said:


> drfouad said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I had received my Asus Maximus XI code and 9900k cpu, the bios would not post at all. I tried troubleshooting the components and still with mobo and cpu alone and 1 module my ram....nothing.
> Rma and just received the replacement today. Still a no go. Spoke to Asus for help, got senior tech to help for an hour. Boards defective. What are the odds? Twice?
> Am I doing something wrong?
> I installed my z270 and 7700k and it’s up and running.
> I don’t get it. Did I miss something?
> 
> 
> 
> Did you consider that the CPU could be dead? Very rare but still possible.
> See if there's any place or shop around you that can test your CPU if you have access to it. Otherwise it gets messy.
> Sucks when parts don't work. I'm sorry /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif
Click to expand...

Well you may be right. The error lights were for bios and vga. So even with no gpu and one dim of memory on the second slot did t do anything.
I think I will wait and try again from another vendor.
But both mobo and cpu are returned to the two different sellers. Going to get both later in life from somewhere else.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> it's not just added load in my experience. there's something else going on and it happens with AID64 also.


How to we read the VRM temps on the Apex without Asus EC enabled in hwinfo?


----------



## Falkentyne

schoolofmonkey said:


> How to we read the VRM temps on the Apex without Asus EC enabled in hwinfo?


You can't read VRM temps? Pretty sure the EC just controlled fans, RGB and other stuff.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> You can't read VRM temps? Pretty sure the EC just controlled fans, RGB and other stuff.



On my Code X the VRM temperature is reported through the EC. Pretty sure it will be the same.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Falkentyne said:


> You can't read VRM temps? Pretty sure the EC just controlled fans, RGB and other stuff.


You can with the Apex, it's read through the EC same with CPU_Opt fan, which in my case is the 90mm VRM cooling fan.


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> How to we read the VRM temps on the Apex without Asus EC enabled in hwinfo?


 that's the channel the temp (and several voltages) are reported through. did iyou try aid64? or do you not want to read anything via the EC?
edit: in the post right above, it is reading the ASUS EC. It loks like this if the EC is disabled in HWI:


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> that's the channel the temp (and several voltages) are reported through. did iyou try aid64? or do you not want to read anything via the EC?
> edit: in the post right above, it is reading the ASUS EC. It loks like this if the EC is disabled in HWI:


I don't have a problem using EC, never noticed a difference in the system or benchmarks, just the way you guys were talking like that theres a problem using it :thumb:


----------



## l Nuke l

hey thinking bout upgrading my 8700k to the 9900k. just wanted to make sure that my asus z370 apex can handle it just fine.


----------



## Jpmboy

l Nuke l said:


> hey thinking bout upgrading my 8700k to the 9900k. just wanted to make sure that my asus z370 apex can handle it just fine.


no problem @Mr.T is running the same config.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> no problem @Mr.T is running the same config.


 @Jpmboy I'll PM you or in the 9900k thread let you know how my Aorus Xtreme works out. First time in a very long time I never went Asus. What I'm worried about is the memory overclocking won't be a good as Asus, I'm not aware of the topology for it but it's an eight-layer PCB with three copper layers I think, so here's hoping. :h34r-smi

Just watched the Bullzoid video. M Trace T-Topology which is best for 4x8GB or my 4x16GB kit I have (I never use). 

And it maxes out using 12 phases of the 16 phase VRM at my voltages unless I'm benching, then I MIGHT use 16 phases.


----------



## Jpmboy

I hope your experience is better than mine. I have a x299 Aorus gaming 9 and an x299 Aorus Gaming ITX. the itx board actually took an economy 2400kit to 3200 stable with a 7740X - and has been running that in an HTPC for some time now. My G9 was no where near as ram capable as the Apex with any ram kit or cpu, I think it's just a bad sample (was a gift, so WTH). this is it:


----------



## Nephalem89

Hello good afternoon in your opinion buy asus code z390 is a good choice? Sorry I don't decide to buy it z390 motherboard... Where is the best option for overclok choice for overclock 9900k thanks a lot


----------



## Zammin

Hi everyone!

New to the thread, but I've owned my Maximus XI Formula and 9900k for a little while now. I've not been able to do any overclocking just yet as it's temporarily air cooled (Dark Rock Pro 4) while I'm waiting for the rest of the parts I need to get it under water. At stock speeds it's already really hot under AVX stress tests so I have to leave it at the default speed of 4.7Ghz for now with XMP I and MCE on auto. Looking forward to getting it under water so I can play around with it a bit more.

I apologise if this has already been covered but something that has been bugging me is that I get different Vcore readings in different software with this motherboard and CPU, something that was not present with my old Maximus X Code and 8700k. I am aware that the newer Z390 Maximus boards read Vcore differently to previous models (approx 100mv less) but this is a different issue I believe.

- In ROG CPU-Z under AVX stress loads I get a reading of around 1.144V
- In AIDA64 under AVX stress loads I get a reading of around 1.344V
- In HWinfo64 under AVX stress loads I get a reading of around 1.250V

I honestly have no idea which of these is the correct reading or why I have 3 entirely different readings. I should also mention that I was not running all of these apps at the same time, but the stress tests I was using were RealBench and AIDA64, both of which seem to hold the CPU at a fairly steady voltage.

I also noted that by default the Vcore seems to run 100mv higher in AVX stress loads than it does during non-AVX stress loads like Cinebench.

My question is, do you guys also see this behavior at stock settings on your Z390/9900k systems? and does anyone know which of these applications is reading the correct Vcore (or was the term Vdie what we are using now)?


----------



## Falkentyne

Zammin said:


> Hi everyone!
> 
> New to the thread, but I've owned my Maximus XI Formula and 9900k for a little while now. I've not been able to do any overclocking just yet as it's temporarily air cooled (Dark Rock Pro 4) while I'm waiting for the rest of the parts I need to get it under water. At stock speeds it's already really hot under AVX stress tests so I have to leave it at the default speed of 4.7Ghz for now with XMP I and MCE on auto. Looking forward to getting it under water so I can play around with it a bit more.
> 
> I apologise if this has already been covered but something that has been bugging me is that I get different Vcore readings in different software with this motherboard and CPU, something that was not present with my old Maximus X Code and 8700k. I am aware that the newer Z390 Maximus boards read Vcore differently to previous models (approx 100mv less) but this is a different issue I believe.
> 
> - In ROG CPU-Z under AVX stress loads I get a reading of around 1.144V
> - In AIDA64 under AVX stress loads I get a reading of around 1.344V
> - In HWinfo64 under AVX stress loads I get a reading of around 1.250V
> 
> I honestly have no idea which of these is the correct reading or why I have 3 entirely different readings. I should also mention that I was not running all of these apps at the same time, but the stress tests I was using were RealBench and AIDA64, both of which seem to hold the CPU at a fairly steady voltage.
> 
> I also noted that by default the Vcore seems to run 100mv higher in AVX stress loads than it does during non-AVX stress loads like Cinebench.
> 
> My question is, do you guys also see this behavior at stock settings on your Z390/9900k systems? and does anyone know which of these applications is reading the correct Vcore (or was the term Vdie what we are using now)?


Just use HWinfo64, not cpu-z and not aida64. If there is more than one sensor, HWinfo64 should show them.


----------



## KedarWolf

I never let my CPU go over 80C stress testing. It's pretty much known you don't want to really exceed that even when stress testing.
On my 9900k I manually set the all the FMA's, AVX's and SSE's as enabled by editing the local.txt file in Prime95.
I add the below to my Prime96 local.txt file.

CpuSupportsAVX=1
CpuSupportsAVX2=1 
CpuSupportsAVX512F=1 
CpuSupportsFMA3=1 
CpuSupportsFMA4=1 
CpuSupportsSSE=1
CpuSupportsSSE2=1

Custom settings I use that keeps temps down are 

Minimum FFT '1344'
Maximum FFT '1344'
Check Run FFT's In Place
Time to Run Each FFT size 15 minutes

Under water cooling, I never go above 65C with the AVX Offset in the BIOS disabled. 
I let in run overnight with HWInfo running, Sensors Only, and if I get no WHEA Errors and no threads stopping I can be sure my CPU overclock is stable. 
The reason why I use no AVX Offset to overclock my PC is I don't use programs that use AVX except Prime95 to stress test it and you'll get a higher stable overclock with lower voltages with no AVX Offset but Prime95 will use AVX to stress test your PC still with those settings which is more thorough than AVX disabled in Prime95 and more likely to find errors.

If you want to run Small FFT's or Blend put your local.txt as below to keep temps lower. 

CpuSupportsAVX=0
CpuSupportsAVX2=0
CpuSupportsAVX512F=0
CpuSupportsFMA3=0
CpuSupportsFMA4=0 
CpuSupportsSSE=1
CpuSupportsSSE2=1

Or if you leave AVX enabled in Prime95 run the test with an AVX Offset of 2 to 5 depending on your max CPU temps while Prime95 is running. 
But as I said, you'll need more CPU voltage to stay stable using an AVX Offset. Try to stay under 80C at all times to avoid too much heat as too much heat can reduce how well your CPU performs in the long run.

If you're going to use AVX enabled programs with no AVX Offset test the temps when you do with HWInfo because some AVX programs can make your CPU spike dangerously over 80C.﻿


----------



## Sjonnieh

hey guys,

i am using the asus rog maximus xi hero, but my problem is when my computer boots it wont boot my mouse and keyboard on startup so i cant get into bios.
Any fix coming soon im using, TP-Link USB 3.0 7-Port Hub and connected on there is my Corsair Gaming Strafe RGB Cherry MX Silent + Corsair Gaming Glaive RGB Mouse.
thats problem 1.
And yes i can get into the bios from my desktop but thats not the problem it is very anoying to not have working keyboard and mouse until win10 is loaded and no i didnt have this problem previously i just upgraded mobo cpu and ram 1 week ago.

Now problem 2 is, when i tried ai overclocking it clocked my 9700k at 5,2ghz at 1.325v which is fine except for the fact it crashes at windows and i cant use my keyboard at boot.
So is ai overcloking not good enough yet or just bad luck?

Problem 3, There is a promotion going in my country about getting black ops 4 digital delux edition with my motherboard but when i try to activate the code on asus site my motherboard doesnt even show in the dropdown list.

Problem 4, i emailed you guys (asus) on 3 diffrent email adresses and no response on any of them. (bah)

thx for reading my problems maybe someone can help me.


----------



## Zammin

Sjonnieh said:


> hey guys,
> 
> i am using the asus rog maximus xi hero, but my problem is when my computer boots it wont boot my mouse and keyboard on startup so i cant get into bios.
> Any fix coming soon im using, TP-Link USB 3.0 7-Port Hub and connected on there is my Corsair Gaming Strafe RGB Cherry MX Silent + Corsair Gaming Glaive RGB Mouse.
> thats problem 1.
> And yes i can get into the bios from my desktop but thats not the problem it is very anoying to not have working keyboard and mouse until win10 is loaded and no i didnt have this problem previously i just upgraded mobo cpu and ram 1 week ago.
> 
> Now problem 2 is, when i tried ai overclocking it clocked my 9700k at 5,2ghz at 1.325v which is fine except for the fact it crashes at windows and i cant use my keyboard at boot.
> So is ai overcloking not good enough yet or just bad luck?
> 
> Problem 3, There is a promotion going in my country about getting black ops 4 digital delux edition with my motherboard but when i try to activate the code on asus site my motherboard doesnt even show in the dropdown list.
> 
> Problem 4, i emailed you guys (asus) on 3 diffrent email adresses and no response on any of them. (bah)
> 
> thx for reading my problems maybe someone can help me.


As for your first problem with the mouse, there is a good chance it is the mouse and not the motherboard. I had two Glaives in the past and they were terrible mice, riddled with issues. I returned them both. I stopped buying Corsair mice after that. Mine would often work in BIOS but wouldn't turn on once in the OS until they were unplugged and plugged back in. Try that and see if it starts working.

As for the issue with the Black Ops 4 code, I too had to go through a lot of trouble to get the code. I registered my XI Formula through the promotion page and never got an email. I would recommend contacting [email protected] and [email protected] as that is what I had to do to get the ball rolling, even though it was slow. Your motherboard and CPU is eligible for the promotion so just make sure you provide them with a proof of purchase and photos of the serial numbers.


----------



## Sjonnieh

Zammin said:


> As for your first problem with the mouse, there is a good chance it is the mouse and not the motherboard. I had two Glaives in the past and they were terrible mice, riddled with issues. I returned them both. I stopped buying Corsair mice after that. Mine would often work in BIOS but wouldn't turn on once in the OS until they were unplugged and plugged back in. Try that and see if it starts working.
> 
> As for the issue with the Black Ops 4 code, I too had to go through a lot of trouble to get the code. I registered my XI Formula through the promotion page and never got an email. I would recommend contacting [email protected] and [email protected] as that is what I had to do to get the ball rolling, even though it was slow. Your motherboard and CPU is eligible for the promotion so just make sure you provide them with a proof of purchase and photos of the serial numbers.


Thnx for the advice on the emails.
As for the mouse issue my mouse works fine just got it 1month ago but i upgraded a week ago before all that everything work fine for 3 years also with other mice.
Everything didnt work after i changed my mobo cpu and ram.
and i used to run win 10 and 7 on previous build, and the upgrade i did was only cpu,mobo and ram.
thank for the advice though

edit, tried to email the [email protected] there inbox is full lol guess im not the only one with problems.


----------



## Zammin

Sjonnieh said:


> Thnx for the advice on the emails.
> As for the mouse issue my mouse works fine just got it 1month ago but i upgraded a week ago before all that everything work fine for 3 years also with other mice.
> Everything didnt work after i changed my mobo cpu and ram.
> and i used to run win 10 and 7 on previous build, and the upgrade i did was only cpu,mobo and ram.
> thank for the advice though
> 
> edit, tried to email the [email protected] there inbox is full lol guess im not the only one with problems.


If you unplug the mouse and plug it back in while in windows, does it start working?

If you can't get through to asus-promotion, contact Adrian and let him know.


----------



## Sjonnieh

Zammin said:


> If you unplug the mouse and plug it back in while in windows, does it start working?
> 
> If you can't get through to asus-promotion, contact Adrian and let him know.


In windows everything works fine no need to unplug anything, the problem is it is loading my keyboard and mice only when i arive in windows.
So no keyboard and mice on startup and so on untill windows is loaded
And yes i emailed the other mail adress you gave me already.


----------



## Zammin

Sjonnieh said:


> In windows everything works fine no need to unplug anything, the problem is it is loading my keyboard and mice only when i arive in windows.
> So no keyboard and mice on startup and so on untill windows is loaded
> And yes i emailed the other mail adress you gave me already.


Ah sorry I misunderstood. Yeah it's not the same issue I had with my Glaives then.


----------



## Jpmboy

Sjonnieh said:


> In windows everything works fine no need to unplug anything, the problem is it is loading my keyboard and mice only when i arive in windows.
> So no keyboard and mice on startup and so on untill windows is loaded
> And yes i emailed the other mail adress you gave me already.


if you return the bios to default settings (clr cmos) will the keyboard work in bios? It is very common for the mouse to not work in bios. does not on my Apex X, and Max XIE. But my rog spatha mouse does work on my Apex Vi bios. Pretty useless anyway, you really only want (or need) the keyboard in bios. If you have any other keyboard - even a cheapo $8 one - try it.


----------



## Sjonnieh

Jpmboy said:


> if you return the bios to default settings (clr cmos) will the keyboard work in bios? It is very common for the mouse to not work in bios. does not on my Apex X, and Max XIE. But my rog spatha mouse does work on my Apex Vi bios. Pretty useless anyway, you really only want (or need) the keyboard in bios. If you have any other keyboard - even a cheapo $8 one - try it.


clear cmos does nothing and both keyboard and mouse dont work i just want a bios update for usb devices to be loaded when i start my computer to enter bios.
it was more like does more people encounter the same problem and if yes if there a bios update coming to make it work.


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted, remembered is Asus thread.


----------



## Jpmboy

Sjonnieh said:


> clear cmos does nothing and both keyboard and mouse dont work i just want a bios update for usb devices to be loaded when i start my computer to enter bios.
> i*t was more like does more people encounter the same problem and if yes if there a bios update coming to make it work*.


it not a common problem. So don;t expect a bios update simply to address what you have going on there.  have you tried a different keyboard??


----------



## Sjonnieh

Jpmboy said:


> it not a common problem. So don;t expect a bios update simply to address what you have going on there.  have you tried a different keyboard??


Well i checked asus forum and there are alot more ppl with the Asus rog maximus xi hero board with the same problem so its more common than you might think.
And also the last bios update stated fixed usb issues which didnt fix anything for me atleast and for more users on other forums.
and i did not try another keyboard and that is because i was running my computer fine untill i changed the mobo/cpu and ram.
Before all that no issues and i was using msi mobo back then.


----------



## encrypted11

If you require a keyboard with a mouse input that works well in the bios. Works without drivers as well.









Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

Sjonnieh said:


> Well i checked asus forum and there are alot more ppl with the Asus rog maximus xi hero board with the same problem so its more common than you might think.
> And also the last bios update stated fixed usb issues which didnt fix anything for me atleast and for more users on other forums.
> and i did not try another keyboard and that is because i was running my computer fine untill i changed the mobo/cpu and ram.
> Before all that no issues and i was using msi mobo back then.


different mobo may look for a different keyboard handshake than you old mobo. So just because it worked on your previous mobo really means little with the new one. It's not a question of whether the keyboard is working, it's whether the mobo can recognize it. Try a simple $8 keyboard. And yes, when you see USB (compatibility) updates as part of a bios description, it is to address both very new and some older attached devices.


----------



## Sjonnieh

encrypted11 said:


> If you require a keyboard with a mouse input that works well in the bios. Works without drivers as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk





Jpmboy said:


> different mobo may look for a different keyboard handshake than you old mobo. So just because it worked on your previous mobo really means little with the new one. It's not a question of whether the keyboard is working, it's whether the mobo can recognize it. Try a simple $8 keyboard. And yes, when you see USB (compatibility) updates as part of a bios description, it is to address both very new and some older attached devices.


Well thanks for the input guys, but i got a app that brings to to bios from windows itself and when i am in the bios i turn my usb hub off and on and then it works.
But when i try to turn off my hub off at boot and turn it back on it doesnt work, atleast i can get into bios and do stuff.


----------



## Jpmboy

Sjonnieh said:


> Well thanks for the input guys, but i got a app that brings to to bios from windows itself a*nd when i am in the bios i turn my usb hub off and on and then it works*.
> But when i try to turn off my hub off at boot and turn it back on it doesnt work, atleast i can get into bios and do stuff.


that's the handshake issue. What "boot to bios" app are you using?


----------



## Sjonnieh

Jpmboy said:


> that's the handshake issue. What "boot to bios" app are you using?


i think its called Asus boot setting tool.


----------



## TheLastHero

Can anyone tell me if the latest BIOS (Version 1601) for the STRIX z370-F is worth updating to? In terms of achieving a good overclock, and just overall. I'm currently on one of the 14xx builds, can't remember which one. 
*
*


----------



## Sjonnieh

Jpmboy said:


> that's the handshake issue.


Do you know how to solve this issue?


----------



## Jpmboy

TheLastHero said:


> Can anyone tell me if the latest BIOS (Version 1601) for the STRIX z370-F is worth updating to? In terms of achieving a good overclock, and just overall. I'm currently on one of the 14xx builds, can't remember which one.


IMO, unless you are having issues with bios that's running... no. I also would not expect any OC miracles in a bios update for a rather mature platform (eg vs z390). MOst current z370 bios updattes are focused on the 9-series cpus.


Sjonnieh said:


> Do you know how to solve this issue?


try disabling fast boot in win 10 and in bios. Again, have you tried a different USB device (kb or mouse or both). Even just to see if it is a part-specific issue?


----------



## tatmMRKIV

ugh i cant get my code to do 4600 xmp with g.skill royals for the life of me


----------



## Scotty99

TheLastHero said:


> Can anyone tell me if the latest BIOS (Version 1601) for the STRIX z370-F is worth updating to? In terms of achieving a good overclock, and just overall. I'm currently on one of the 14xx builds, can't remember which one.
> *
> *


Ive updated to every bios for that board and havent noticed any negative effects on any of them, my straightforward 5.0 OC has worked the same on all of them.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scotty99 said:


> Ive updated to every bios for that board and havent noticed any negative effects on any of them, *my straightforward 5.0 OC has worked the same on all *of them.


^^ exactly. :thumb:


----------



## Zammin

Not trying to invalidate anyone else's experience with the Z370 BIOS updates, but the last two times I updated my X Code my 5Ghz 8700k was no longer able to pass AIDA64 afterward and needed a little more voltage each time. I don't know if it was the BIOS update that caused it but that was the last thing I changed each time. I only needed to add like .010-.015V each time but still, it was heavily tested each time and after the last two updates I had to increase the voltage both times.

I think that was 1401 and 1601. I don't have 1801, I don't think I'll be updating it anymore as it's working fine.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Zammin said:


> Not trying to invalidate anyone else's experience with the Z370 BIOS updates, but the last two times I updated my X Code my 5Ghz 8700k was no longer able to pass AIDA64 afterward and needed a little more voltage each time. I don't know if it was the BIOS update that caused it but that was the last thing I changed each time. I only needed to add like .010-.015V each time but still, it was heavily tested each time and after the last two updates I had to increase the voltage both times.
> 
> I think that was 1401 and 1601. I don't have 1801, I don't think I'll be updating it anymore as it's working fine.


For me the last BIOS update was to 1704 on my Apex, but there's no real point going to 1801, everything is running perfectly, there's no stability issues (it's been like that since 1602), plus I just couldn't be bothered setting everything up again 

My chip hasn't been the best overclocker anyway [email protected] AVX offset -1, but this is to be OCCT Small data set stable :thumb:


----------



## Nikos4Life

Hi there happy new year to everyone,

recently I have started to build a new rig powered with the Asus Maximus XI Extreme motherboard paired with a 9900K. 

I have some doubts about the best configuration possible to maximize the usage of this motherboard. 

First doubts are about M.2 drives: 

This board has a DIMM2 slot as well as 2xM.2 connectors on the PCB. 

Right now and just because it is easier to test the build outside I am using the DIMM2 slot. 

The problem with this is that the moment you start using this slot the second PCIe 3.0x16 slots is disabled. So if I want to use the second slot of the motherboard I am not able to do it. 

So I have thought in differents solutions:

Using the other two m.2 connectors instead of the DIMM2 slot. 

So even if I need more m.2 drives I can use and expansion card like the Asus HyperX which allows 4 more m.2 drives.

As for the GPU I will use a TXp so I am not sure if using PCIE3.0 8x will decrease the performance at all. 

If the performance goes down but just in an unnoticeable way I do not mind but otherwise I rather not use the slot. 

So just to sum up, 

I am going to use: 

Asus Maximus XI Extreme
9900K
TXp
M.2 drives (at least I need two or worst case sceneario 1 m2 + n SSDs) 
1 x USB expansion PCIe 4x 
1 x USB PCIe 1x

Which configuration should I use in your opinion?

Kind regards,
Nikos


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

8x pci-E for any card is so small, you can only notice in benchmarks. even then, it might be hard to tell. When you go sli, it's a bigger deal. But still a very small performance loss. On the Apex X, the Dimm.2 slot being used doesn't take away and cpu pci-E lanes.


----------



## thebski

tatmMRKIV said:


> ugh i cant get my code to do 4600 xmp with g.skill royals for the life of me


There are only two boards on the QVL for the 4600 Royal kits, the Maximus X Apex and the Maximus XI Gene. You should expect to need manual tweaking when using this kit on any board other than those two. I'm also going to be honest with you, 4600 MHz is going to be a chore for a lot of CPUs with any kind of reasonable timings.


----------



## Falkentyne

Nikos4Life said:


> Hi there happy new year to everyone,
> 
> recently I have started to build a new rig powered with the Asus Maximus XI Extreme motherboard paired with a 9900K.
> 
> I have some doubts about the best configuration possible to maximize the usage of this motherboard.
> 
> First doubts are about M.2 drives:
> 
> This board has a DIMM2 slot as well as 2xM.2 connectors on the PCB.
> 
> Right now and just because it is easier to test the build outside I am using the DIMM2 slot.
> 
> The problem with this is that the moment you start using this slot the second PCIe 3.0x16 slots is disabled. So if I want to use the second slot of the motherboard I am not able to do it.
> 
> So I have thought in differents solutions:
> 
> Using the other two m.2 connectors instead of the DIMM2 slot.
> 
> So even if I need more m.2 drives I can use and expansion card like the Asus HyperX which allows 4 more m.2 drives.
> 
> As for the GPU I will use a TXp so I am not sure if using PCIE3.0 8x will decrease the performance at all.
> 
> If the performance goes down but just in an unnoticeable way I do not mind but otherwise I rather not use the slot.
> 
> So just to sum up,
> 
> I am going to use:
> 
> Asus Maximus XI Extreme
> 9900K
> TXp
> M.2 drives (at least I need two or worst case sceneario 1 m2 + n SSDs)
> 1 x USB expansion PCIe 4x
> 1 x USB PCIe 1x
> 
> Which configuration should I use in your opinion?
> 
> Kind regards,
> Nikos


Are you sure the SECOND PCIE slot is completely disabled for just one M.2 there?
I was under the impression that if you use one of the dimm.2 slots, the PCIE slots will run in a x8/x4 configuration, since your dimm.2 is using x4 also, and x8+x4+x4 = x16.
Now if you are using both dimm.2 slots, then yes.


----------



## Scorpion667

Anyone with an Asus Z70/Z390 mobo optimize their system for low DPC latency? 

I'm looking for a motherboard that is/has:
-Asus (I know the BIOS very well)
-Fantastic VRM cooling (likely go with 9900k)
-Low DPC latency
-no budget constraints


----------



## Jpmboy

Scorpion667 said:


> Anyone with an Asus Z70/Z390 mobo optimize their system for low DPC latency?
> 
> I'm looking for a motherboard that is/has:
> -Asus (I know the BIOS very well)
> -Fantastic VRM cooling (likely go with 9900k)
> -Low DPC latency
> -no budget constraints


 I have the Maximus XI extreme - it is an amazing MB. VRM cooling is super, and it has everything you could ever think of in terms of on board headers. Very impressive MB. Running latency monitor with a das keyboard Pro board, logitech wireless G700, wifi and BT on - no latency issues according to latmon.




Nikos4Life said:


> Hi there happy new year to everyone,
> recently I have started to build a new rig powered with the Asus Maximus XI Extreme motherboard paired with a 9900K.
> I have some doubts about the best configuration possible to maximize the usage of this motherboard.
> First doubts are about M.2 drives:
> This board has a DIMM2 slot as well as 2xM.2 connectors on the PCB.
> Right now and just because it is easier to test the build outside I am using the DIMM2 slot.
> *The problem with this is that the moment you start using this slot the second PCIe 3.0x16 slots is disabled.* So if I want to use the second slot of the motherboard I am not able to do it.
> 
> So I have thought in differents solutions:
> Using the other two m.2 connectors instead of the DIMM2 slot.
> So even if I need more m.2 drives I can use and expansion card like the Asus HyperX which allows 4 more m.2 drives.
> As for the GPU I will use a TXp so I am not sure if using PCIE3.0 8x will decrease the performance at all.
> If the performance goes down but just in an unnoticeable way I do not mind but otherwise I rather not use the slot.
> So just to sum up,
> I am going to use:
> Asus Maximus XI Extreme
> 9900K
> TXp
> M.2 drives (at least I need two or worst case sceneario 1 m2 + n SSDs)
> 1 x USB expansion PCIe 4x
> 1 x USB PCIe 1x
> 
> Which configuration should I use in your opinion?
> 
> Kind regards,
> Nikos


The M.2_1 and _2 slots use the PCH and wil lnot affect the PCIE lane distribution. Use these. I have only one M.2 (in _1) and use sata drives for all other stuff (m.2 only has the OS on it, no user files). I do not think using the PCH for 2 M.2 drives affects the PCIE . Check the bios settings?


----------



## Scorpion667

Jpmboy said:


> I have the Maximus XI extreme - it is an amazing MB. VRM cooling is super, and it has everything you could ever think of in terms of on board headers. Very impressive MB. Running latency monitor with a das keyboard Pro board, logitech wireless G700, wifi and BT on - no latency issues according to latmon.


Sweet. When you get a chance could you send me a screenshot from latmon after leaving it run for a bit?


----------



## Jpmboy

Scorpion667 said:


> Sweet. When you get a chance could you send me a screenshot from latmon after leaving it run for a bit?


3+ hours of use but with adaptive and c-states enabled. latmon's conclusion is simply wrong. The rig runs smooth w/o any hitches. Note the very low DPC, Frankly, no other rig here is a claen for that long of a time.


----------



## Scorpion667

Jpmboy said:


> 3+ hours of use but with adaptive and c-states enabled. latmon's conclusion is simply wrong. The rig runs smooth w/o any hitches. Note the very low DPC, Frankly, no other rig here is a claen for that long of a time.


Thanks for that! I'll likely go with the Asus flagship board again. This Rampage x79 mobo survived a LOT of abuse for 7 years. Few thousand forced reboots, 30ish power outages (10 without surge protector), at least 500 hours stress testing multiple chips, PCH fan disabled since day one; I ran VRM on Extreme with zero power savings board wide, no side panel, no case fans and never any throttling.

Definitely looks better than mine would with EIST/C-States enabled! Below with HPET/EIST/C-States off - I'm sure your board does better when configured the same.


----------



## Jpmboy

Scorpion667 said:


> Thanks for that! I'll likely go with the Asus flagship board again. This Rampage x79 mobo survived a LOT of abuse for 7 years. Few thousand forced reboots, 30ish power outages (10 without surge protector), at least 500 hours stress testing multiple chips, PCH fan disabled since day one; I ran VRM on Extreme with zero power savings board wide, no side panel, no case fans and never any throttling.
> 
> Definitely looks better than mine would with EIST/C-States enabled! Below with HPET/EIST/C-States off - *I'm sure your board does better when configured the same*.


I'd ignore the page fault thing - it's pretty meaningless. DPC interrupts can be a problem especially when attached hardware clashes - a lot has do do with the attached devices (usb, sata, nvme.. etc). I still have x79 (R4BE/4960X) I'll have to check it, but the audio is just perfect with the ASUS supremeFX headphone amp... well as perfect as bit sound can be.


----------



## Zammin

Jpmboy said:


> 3+ hours of use but with adaptive and c-states enabled. latmon's conclusion is simply wrong. The rig runs smooth w/o any hitches. Note the very low DPC, Frankly, no other rig here is a claen for that long of a time.





Scorpion667 said:


> Thanks for that! I'll likely go with the Asus flagship board again. This Rampage x79 mobo survived a LOT of abuse for 7 years. Few thousand forced reboots, 30ish power outages (10 without surge protector), at least 500 hours stress testing multiple chips, PCH fan disabled since day one; I ran VRM on Extreme with zero power savings board wide, no side panel, no case fans and never any throttling.
> 
> Definitely looks better than mine would with EIST/C-States enabled! Below with HPET/EIST/C-States off - I'm sure your board does better when configured the same.





Jpmboy said:


> I'd ignore the page fault thing - it's pretty meaningless. DPC interrupts can be a problem especially when attached hardware clashes - a lot has do do with the attached devices (usb, sata, nvme.. etc). I still have x79 (R4BE/4960X) I'll have to check it, but the audio is just perfect with the ASUS supremeFX headphone amp... well as perfect as bit sound can be.


Hey guys

sorry for the noob questions, this is only the second time I've run LatencyMon and the first time on my 9900k/Maximus XI Formula system and I don't fully understand the whole hard pagefaults thing. On my 8700k/Maximus X Code system I got a hard pagefault count of zero. On my 9900k system it just keeps climbing. Around 1600 in 30 mins and still going up. What causes these and is there a way to address it?

I know you said they are pretty much meaningless but I've been trying to figure out why chrome often freezes on my 9900k system during heavy use or when opening more than say, 9 tabs at once. The system isn't overclocked and my RAM is stable (has been put through HCI Memtest Pro for over 12 hours without any errors) and this is one of the only things I've come across that occurs on the new system and not the other.

Thanks in advance for any assistance.

EDIT: I noticed my LatencyMon readout shows the hard pagefault count but not the resolution time like it does on Scorpion's screenshot. Not sure why this is or what it means.


----------



## Zammin

Zammin said:


> Hey guys
> 
> sorry for the noob questions, this is only the second time I've run LatencyMon and the first time on my 9900k/Maximus XI Formula system and I don't fully understand the whole hard pagefaults thing. On my 8700k/Maximus X Code system I got a hard pagefault count of zero. On my 9900k system it just keeps climbing. Around 1600 in 30 mins and still going up. What causes these and is there a way to address it?
> 
> I know you said they are pretty much meaningless but I've been trying to figure out why chrome often freezes on my 9900k system during heavy use or when opening more than say, 9 tabs at once. The system isn't overclocked and my RAM is stable (has been put through HCI Memtest Pro for over 12 hours without any errors) and this is one of the only things I've come across that occurs on the new system and not the other.
> 
> Thanks in advance for any assistance.
> 
> EDIT: I noticed my LatencyMon readout shows the hard pagefault count but not the resolution time like it does on Scorpion's screenshot. Not sure why this is or what it means.


Actually, running the latest version of LatencyMon on my 8700k system is producing an even higher number of hard pagefaults.. So I guess that musn't be it. Dunno why when I ran it a few months back it got zero, and now it's nearly 3000 in 9 mins. My 9900k system accumulated a bit over 1500 in 49mins.

I'm still interested to know what causes these and how you got yours down to zero JPMboy. Looks like the coreserviceshell.exe of my Trend Micro Antivirus is causing the highest number of them on the 9900k system.


----------



## Jpmboy

Zammin said:


> Actually, running the latest version of LatencyMon on my 8700k system is producing an even higher number of hard pagefaults.. So I guess that musn't be it. Dunno why when I ran it a few months back it got zero, and now it's nearly 3000 in 9 mins. My 9900k system accumulated a bit over 1500 in 49mins.
> 
> I'm still interested to know what causes these and how you got yours down to zero JPMboy. Looks like the coreserviceshell.exe of my Trend Micro Antivirus is causing the highest number of them on the 9900k system.


 it's a windows memory virtualization/pagefile/reserved bytes glitch. Program specific - if I run latmon while folding/boinc/mining it's pegged since these hold data in VM during use.


here's 3 different rigs. No surprises to me: Dx11/12, ACPI etc.. all three rig run NVMe drives , but also have mechanical 10K drives attached. the 6950X rig runs an aquaero and a koolance ERM-3K3U aux cooler.



7980XE/R6A/2 RTX Titans folding











6950X/R5E-10 while folding 2 TXps AND encoding/archiving video from 3 security cameras... non-stop for the past months only breaks for win10 updates.












9700K/Max11E/Titan V folding


----------



## MonarchX

ASUS Hero X WiFi - what are the latest WiFi and BT drivers for it? Aren't they RealTek? Usually Station Drivers has the latest stuff, but in this case it looks as if ASUS website has the newest drivers. Anyone got clean INF-only versions?


----------



## Robostyle

Strange, I have voltage monitoring difference between HWInfo and iXTU, something about 40mV, iXTU shows higher values. Settings are adaptive 1.375 V +0.001, LLC5. Which one should I stick to? - don't have hardware right now to check that personally.


----------



## Jpmboy

are you looking at vcore in one and vid in the other?


----------



## The Pook

Robostyle said:


> Strange, I have voltage monitoring difference between HWInfo and iXTU, something about 40mV, iXTU shows higher values. Settings are adaptive 1.375 V +0.001, LLC5. Which one should I stick to? - don't have hardware right now to check that personally.



Look for the VR VOUT sensor in HWInfo - go by that.


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy
Vcore, both in iXTU and HWInfo

The Pook
I think VR xOUT related to gigabyte therminology mostly.

P.S.Something like this - just look over vcore readings, blue bold in HW
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=244466&thumb=1
Here, settings are adaptive vcore 1.35V - 0.001, LLC5, motherboard is M10H with Vishay vr (M10F/M10C ver.)


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Jpmboy
> Vcore, both in iXTU and HWInfo
> 
> The Pook
> I think VR xOUT related to gigabyte therminology mostly.
> 
> P.S.Something like this - just look over vcore readings, blue bold in HW
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=244466&thumb=1
> Here, settings are adaptive vcore 1.35V - 0.001, LLC5, motherboard is M10H with Vishay vr (M10F/M10C ver.)


HWI is the one to use. No idea what XTU is doing there as it cycles p95 during the bench or stress. Again, on z390/370/270... HWI "matches" well with the measured vcore off the MB.


----------



## The Pook

Robostyle said:


> The Pook
> I think VR xOUT related to gigabyte therminology mostly.


AsRock too.


----------



## Robostyle

Ok, thanks for clarifying :beer:


----------



## nezff

Anyone running a Corsair Vengeance PRO RGB Ram kit on the Asus Prime z390-A. I only see a couple kits in their QVL list which is a 3466mhz and 3600mhz which are both 16gb.

CMW16GX4M2C3466C16 
CMW16GX4M2K3600C16 

Im looking at the 16gb kit 2666mhz CMW16GX4M2A2666C16. If anyone is running this particular kit in this board, please let me know. Thanks.


----------



## jelome1989

Any word on the M11Apex? It's been more than 2 weeks since announcement


----------



## FlanK3r

Some guys have it in hands (from OC community). For me is important, which will be better with same settings in 32M benchmark and CinebenchR15, if Apex X or Apex XI


----------



## Scotty99

So ive got a really odd question, is it ok to use the onboard graphics with an overclocked cpu? Im selling my 1060 to a guy and will be without a gpu for a few days and will be using the display port on my motherboard, should i set everything to stock for a few days or does it not matter?


----------



## wingman99

Scotty99 said:


> So ive got a really odd question, is it ok to use the onboard graphics with an overclocked cpu? Im selling my 1060 to a guy and will be without a gpu for a few days and will be using the display port on my motherboard, should i set everything to stock for a few days or does it not matter?


That is fine to use on board graphics with an overclocked CPU.


----------



## Scotty99

wingman99 said:


> That is fine to use on board graphics with an overclocked CPU.


Cool ive got her plugged in right now, working at 165hz 1440p i didnt touch anything.....im impressed lol.

I just loaded up WoW and i gotta say, this thing is doing way better than i would have guessed! At 100% render scale at 1440p with the 2 graphics preset im getting 35-50 fps lol.


----------



## thrgk

Hi,

I am redoing my rig and just set it up but there was no signal issue. I took both of my 980ti out of my old rig and tried them, with and without a riser cable. I have a mobo replacement on the way but not even sure if that was the issue. Its the ASUS Z390 Hero WIFI one and I have both the 8 and 4 pins connected up top, the 24 pin cable, and the rest of my fans,etc.

However I accidentally had the 6+2 pin cable backwards, so the PSU end was in the GPU and the 6+2 end was in the PSU. Could this of shorted both graphics cards? I don't see how but its weird a brand new mobo would be bad, we tried all 3 pci slots, and tried both 980ti.

Any ideas what it could be? Did I miss a cable or?

Thanks for your time


----------



## Falkentyne

thrgk said:


> Hi,
> 
> I am redoing my rig and just set it up but there was no signal issue. I took both of my 980ti out of my old rig and tried them, with and without a riser cable. I have a mobo replacement on the way but not even sure if that was the issue. Its the ASUS Z390 Hero WIFI one and I have both the 8 and 4 pins connected up top, the 24 pin cable, and the rest of my fans,etc.
> 
> However I accidentally had the 6+2 pin cable backwards, so the PSU end was in the GPU and the 6+2 end was in the PSU. Could this of shorted both graphics cards? I don't see how but its weird a brand new mobo would be bad, we tried all 3 pci slots, and tried both 980ti.
> 
> Any ideas what it could be? Did I miss a cable or?
> 
> Thanks for your time


How is this even possible to do?
They are keyed completely differently.

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/difference-between-cpu-8-pin-and-gpu-8-pin.157117/

Pictures there.
Chance are you simply destroyed something.


----------



## thrgk

I know thats what I assumed. I am not the one doing it since being in a wheelchair doesnt allow it, but someone it happened. So as long as the plug clicks into the PSU it should work in the spot?


----------



## feznz

Has any one got the Aura going correctly on the Apex X just haven't been able to get it to work it is stuck on colour cycle didn't bother me for a long time but really only got the option to turn off on Bios.
Tried several installs of Aura just does not recognise the Mobo but when I use lighting control it picks up the mobo but doesn't work did update to latest bios too just not sure if it is me or it is actually broken.

The lighting control on GPU and Ram work fine


----------



## schoolofmonkey

feznz said:


> Has any one got the Aura going correctly on the Apex X just haven't been able to get it to work it is stuck on colour cycle didn't bother me for a long time but really only got the option to turn off on Bios.
> Tried several installs of Aura just does not recognise the Mobo but when I use lighting control it picks up the mobo but doesn't work did update to latest bios too just not sure if it is me or it is actually broken.
> 
> The lighting control on GPU and Ram work fine


That's odd Aura has been working perfectly on my Apex from the moment I got it.
Have you updated the BIOS, I'm still running 1704...


----------



## Scotty99

feznz said:


> Has any one got the Aura going correctly on the Apex X just haven't been able to get it to work it is stuck on colour cycle didn't bother me for a long time but really only got the option to turn off on Bios.
> Tried several installs of Aura just does not recognise the Mobo but when I use lighting control it picks up the mobo but doesn't work did update to latest bios too just not sure if it is me or it is actually broken.
> 
> The lighting control on GPU and Ram work fine


On my strix z370 i had problems for months with mobo lighting, turns out the cable under the io cover wasnt inserted fully, ive had zero problems since.


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> Has any one got the Aura going correctly on the Apex X just haven't been able to get it to work it is stuck on colour cycle didn't bother me for a long time but really only got the option to turn off on Bios.
> Tried several installs of Aura just does not recognise the Mobo but when I use lighting control it picks up the mobo but doesn't work did update to latest bios too just not sure if it is me or it is actually broken.
> 
> The lighting control on GPU and Ram work fine


no problems here with Aura on the Apex X. working fine on the Apex VI also...


----------



## ssateneth

Are there any high end 2 DIMM slot Z390 boards by ASUS aside from the MAXIMUS XI GENE (micro-ATX)? Looking to do 4500MHz RAM reliably without having to retrain 50 times


----------



## Jpmboy

Apex XI soon is what I hear...


----------



## Nizzen

Maybe off topic, but Asus z390 apex is in stock in Norway


----------



## jelome1989

Nizzen said:


> Maybe off topic, but Asus z390 apex is in stock in Norway


Damn. Does the store have an online shop? Can you give me a link?


----------



## thrgk

When using the bottom M2 slot, do I need to do anything in Bios? For some reason I'm getting no signal on my gpu (it's in the top pcie slot). First m2 so wasnt sure.

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

thrgk said:


> When using the bottom M2 slot, do I need to do anything in Bios? For some reason I'm getting no signal on my gpu (it's in the top pcie slot). First m2 so wasnt sure.
> 
> Thanks


need more info... like what MB etc. :blinksmil


----------



## Nizzen

jelome1989 said:


> Damn. Does the store have an online shop? Can you give me a link?


https://www.proshop.no/Motherboard/...90-Intel-LGA1151-socket-DDR4-RAM-ATX-/2680748


----------



## schoolofmonkey

What did Asus do to the XI Apex, the uniqueness is gone, looks like a standard motherboard now


----------



## thrgk

It's an Asus z390 Hero wifi. I've tried 3 different video cards and still get no signal. I have the motherboard hdmi to my TV so I can see in the bios. For all 3 cards I get "no VGA card " in the bios > tools > gpu information.

Any idea what it could be? I've already replaced the motherboard, checked psa and cable continuity. I'm at a lose.



Jpmboy said:


> thrgk said:
> 
> 
> 
> When using the bottom M2 slot, do I need to do anything in Bios? For some reason I'm getting no signal on my gpu (it's in the top pcie slot). First m2 so wasnt sure.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> need more info... like what MB etc. /forum/images/smilies/blinksmiley.gif
Click to expand...


----------



## Jpmboy

thrgk said:


> It's an Asus z390 Hero wifi. I've tried 3 different video cards and still get no signal. I have the motherboard hdmi to my TV so I can see in the bios. For all 3 cards I get "no VGA card " in the bios > tools > gpu information.
> 
> Any idea what it could be? *I've already replaced the motherboard*, checked psa and cable continuity. I'm at a lose.


 in bios make sure the video setting is on Auto and not iGPU? (or, do a clrcmos and make sure the video cable is connected to the gfx card and not the IGPU (MB) connector during POST.

If I understand this... the same thing has happened on 2 MBs? If yes, and you know the cards work, and the above fails, it's something other than the motherboard.


----------



## thrgk

Jpmboy said:


> in bios make sure the video setting is on Auto and not iGPU? (or, do a clrcmos and make sure the video cable is connected to the gfx card and not the IGPU (MB) connector during POST.
> 
> If I understand this... the same thing has happened on 2 MBs? If yes, and you know the cards work, and the above fails, it's something other than the motherboard.


Yea the cards worked, all 3 did. I had the psu on, computer off, cleared CMOS. I updated to latest bios last night and nothing. I dont think the ASUS Maximus Xi hero has pcie switches right?

On my old Asus Extreme V, it had DIMM switches I believe.

Im stumped, 4th computer and never had this issue. I've tried my tv and monitor to. In the bios though, when I go to tools > gpu information it says No VGA card. Any idea why? Mean even if the primary monitor is wrong it should still see it


----------



## Jpmboy

thrgk said:


> Yea the cards worked, all 3 did. I had the psu on, computer off, cleared CMOS. I updated to latest bios last night and nothing. I dont think the ASUS Maximus Xi hero has pcie switches right?
> 
> On my old Asus Extreme V, it had DIMM switches I believe.
> 
> Im stumped, 4th computer and never had this issue. I've tried my tv and monitor to. In the bios though, when I go to tools > gpu information it says No VGA card. Any idea why? Mean even if the primary monitor is wrong it should still see it


No PCIE switches on that board.
The GPU post Info is only available with capable cards
any SSD in the CPU M.2?
Did you try the clrcmos again as asked? or just going by what you see after a bios flash?
You can reflash and see if the flash got borked somehow.


----------



## thrgk

Jpmboy said:


> in bios make sure the video setting is on Auto and not iGPU? (or, do a clrcmos and make sure the video cable is connected to the gfx card and not the IGPU (MB) connector during POST.
> 
> If I understand this... the same thing has happened on 2 MBs? If yes, and you know the cards work, and the above fails, it's something other than the motherboard.





Jpmboy said:


> No PCIE switches on that board.
> The GPU post Info is only available with capable cards
> any SSD in the CPU M.2?
> Did you try the clrcmos again as asked? or just going by what you see after a bios flash?
> You can reflash and see if the flash got borked somehow.


I had a m2 plugged in the lower slot (towards the bottom of the motherboard), however I unplugged that so currently I have no ssd or m2 ssd plugged in.

I cleared cmos by clicking the button on the back of the mobo (should I remove the watch battery thing as well?)

I'll reflash now and see, so bummed out


----------



## thrgk

everything in platform misc configuration is disabled, other than pci express clock gating.

I set primary display to PCI-E but when I save and exit and check it, its back to CPU graphics. I did turn off the computer and PSU and hold CLEAR Cmos for 10 seconds as well.

Any ideas what else? I am stumped

EDIT: Even setting primary display to auto and saving it, it goes back to cpu graphics.


----------



## Jpmboy

thrgk said:


> everything in platform misc configuration is disabled, other than pci express clock gating.
> 
> I set primary display to PCI-E but when I save and exit and check it, its back to CPU graphics. I did turn off the computer and PSU and hold CLEAR Cmos for 10 seconds as well.
> 
> Any ideas what else? I am stumped
> 
> EDIT: Even setting primary display to auto and saving it, it goes back to cpu graphics.


ugh! that's a tough one. Bent Pins fouling the PCIE? Or gunk stuck to the CPU contact pad?


----------



## thrgk

Yea want to cry lol. 

Gunk on the cpu contact pad, where would I check for that? Like if it leaked off the top of the IHS? I'm buying a new gpu today just a cheap one from best buy to definitively rule out gpu and pcie slot. I changed ram to 1 stick as well and tried my alternate psu last night. Bios I updated and cleared again as well this morning.

Thanks for helping me. Never had this issue and it's so annoying. 




Jpmboy said:


> thrgk said:
> 
> 
> 
> everything in platform misc configuration is disabled, other than pci express clock gating.
> 
> I set primary display to PCI-E but when I save and exit and check it, its back to CPU graphics. I did turn off the computer and PSU and hold CLEAR Cmos for 10 seconds as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Any ideas what else? I am stumped
> 
> EDIT: Even setting primary display to auto and saving it, it goes back to cpu graphics.
> 
> 
> 
> ugh! that's a tough one. Bent Pins fouling the PCIE? Or gunk stuck to the CPU contact pad?
Click to expand...


----------



## Jpmboy

thrgk said:


> Yea want to cry lol.
> 
> Gunk on the cpu contact pad, *where would I check for that?* Like if it leaked off the top of the IHS? I'm buying a new gpu today just a cheap one from best buy to definitively rule out gpu and pcie slot. I changed ram to 1 stick as well and tried my alternate psu last night. Bios I updated and cleared again as well this morning.
> 
> Thanks for helping me. Never had this issue and it's so annoying.


pull the cpu and check the bottom contact pads for "gunk"... like TIM or anything. And check the socket pins at the same time


----------



## chibi

It's about that time to refresh the OS and tune up the system again. New bios, updated drivers and having a look at overclocks again for long term stability. Since 8700K launch I've been on adaptive with a high default vid for 5.0GHz (1.40V). This time I'm thinking to just go straight manual mode since the desktop is mainly used for gaming and the odd bit of forum reading.

My question - is the lower idle voltage with adaptive mode worth it for the odd idle / forum browse? Since gaming is always pegging the voltage to 1.40V, should I just stick to it? Also, thoughts on 4200 C17 or 4000 C16? Assume Sec/Tert Timings are tight.


----------



## Jpmboy

chibi said:


> It's about that time to refresh the OS and tune up the system again. New bios, updated drivers and having a look at overclocks again for long term stability. Since 8700K launch I've been on adaptive with a high default vid for 5.0GHz (1.40V). This time I'm thinking to just go straight manual mode since the desktop is mainly used for gaming and the odd bit of forum reading.
> 
> *My question - is the lower idle voltage with adaptive mode worth it for the odd idle / forum browse*? Since gaming is always pegging the voltage to 1.40V, should I just stick to it? Also, thoughts on 4200 C17 or 4000 C16? Assume Sec/Tert Timings are tight.


No. voltage is only meaningful under load... when amps are being pulled and wattage increases. Idle voltage is nothing to worry about.


----------



## chibi

Jpmboy said:


> No. voltage is only meaningful under load... when amps are being pulled and wattage increases. Idle voltage is nothing to worry about.


Ok makes sense. If using manual mode, can you please advise on these settings?

*Advanced\CPU Config\CPU - Power Management Controll*
Intel SpeedStep: Auto
Turbo Mode: Enabled
CPU C-States: Disabled
CFG Lock: Disabled
Intel Speed Shift Technology: Enabled

Should I change the above from what is currently set with Adaptive Mode?

Thx


----------



## Jpmboy

chibi said:


> Ok makes sense. If using manual mode, can you please advise on these settings?
> 
> *Advanced\CPU Config\CPU - Power Management Controll*
> Intel SpeedStep: Auto
> Turbo Mode: Enabled
> CPU C-States: Disabled
> CFG Lock: Disabled
> Intel Speed Shift Technology: Enabled
> 
> Should I change the above from what is currently set with Adaptive Mode?
> 
> Thx


even with adaptive mode, the C6 state comm link really needs to be open with intel speedSHIFT enabled. Generally, on skylake and newer, you can disable speed step and enable shift. I'd enable c states to C6 and package C to Auto when using manual mode if you leave your rig on at idle at times. Other than that, those settings are fine.


----------



## thrgk

Good news no gunk. I did call asus tech support, they said it wouldn't be the first time someone got 2 bad boards sinx ethey are made in batches. Apparently there is one chip that controls all the PCI lanes (thought the cpu did this?).

Anyway I'm trying one more replacement motherboard. I picked up a 2080 at bestbuy just to confirm it wasnt the gpu's I had it th as t didn't work either.




Jpmboy said:


> thrgk said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yea want to cry lol.
> 
> Gunk on the cpu contact pad, *where would I check for that?* Like if it leaked off the top of the IHS? I'm buying a new gpu today just a cheap one from best buy to definitively rule out gpu and pcie slot. I changed ram to 1 stick as well and tried my alternate psu last night. Bios I updated and cleared again as well this morning.
> 
> Thanks for helping me. Never had this issue and it's so annoying.
> 
> 
> 
> pull the cpu and check the bottom contact pads for "gunk"... like TIM or anything. And check the socket pins at the same time
Click to expand...


----------



## Jpmboy

cool - new board should resolve it.


----------



## KedarWolf

chibi said:


> Ok makes sense. If using manual mode, can you please advise on these settings?
> 
> *Advanced\CPU Config\CPU - Power Management Controll*
> Intel SpeedStep: Auto
> Turbo Mode: Enabled
> CPU C-States: Disabled
> CFG Lock: Disabled
> Intel Speed Shift Technology: Enabled
> 
> Should I change the above from what is currently set with Adaptive Mode?
> 
> Thx


Just to get the most out of my OC, I disable all C-States and Speed Shift, Enable SpeedStep and put my Power Plan in Windows Control Panel to Performance or Ultimate and change the Minimum CPU in the Power Plan to 0%. Then it downclocks the CPU and voltages on idle but it doesn't really affect your overclock negatively like C-States could. :h34r-smi

That being said, C-States on newer motherboards are quite good and you likely can get the same overclock with them enabled as not, my suggestion is a throwback from my old X99 days.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
0% minimum cpu state what's wrong with 5% which is default balanced power plan


----------



## KedarWolf

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 0% minimum cpu state what's wrong with 5% which is default balanced power plan


Balanced as some options I don't like PCI-e power management enabled, hard disks turning off, Sleep and Hibernation enabled and a few other things I don't like or really need.

As a power user, I prefer them to disable them. In Windows 10 Pro I enable the Ultimate Power Plan with a regedit tweak, or it comes with Windows 10 LTSC 2019 and I choose that. 

Then just set the Minimum CPU to 0% and the idle voltages and CPU speeds are just fine, the lowest they'll go.

I've heard a few years back and a couple of motherboard platforms ago someone needing it at 10% to stay stable but I've had no issues that way.


----------



## tostitobandito

There's no reason to disable c-states/speedstep. You will OC and perform just as well with them on, and will use less power (and with adaptive voltage will greatly lower your vcore as well). Anytime you have more than a few percent of CPU load it will go to the max multiplier/clock until it drops back down. It doesn't take a lot. Prior to me unlinking the RAM from my Aura Lighting service it was using 3-4% CPU all the time, which was enough to keep all 8 cores at 5.1 GHz all the time. After fixing that I drop down as low as 800 MHz per core when idle.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Okay I was just wondering why 0% instead of 5% not balanced from performance differences 
Performance yes is best ultimate is disabled by default probably for a good reason knowing MS bugware


----------



## KedarWolf

tostitobandito said:


> There's no reason to disable c-states/speedstep. You will OC and perform just as well with them on, and will use less power (and with adaptive voltage will greatly lower your vcore as well). Anytime you have more than a few percent of CPU load it will go to the max multiplier/clock until it drops back down. It doesn't take a lot. Prior to me unlinking the RAM from my Aura Lighting service it was using 3-4% CPU all the time, which was enough to keep all 8 cores at 5.1 GHz all the time. After fixing that I drop down as low as 800 MHz per core when idle.


I get 800MHZ core speeds with my options as well. And I did say C-states are probably just fine these days. 

But there is an odd chance if you're on the cutting edge of a high overclock that like I am, as in the past, SpeedStep may be the better option. Back in the day before SpeedShift it was the way to go. 

You young whippersnappers and your new fangled C-States, why I outta!!


----------



## Jpmboy

tostitobandito said:


> There's no reason to disable c-states/speedstep. You will OC and perform just as well with them on, and will use less power (and with adaptive voltage will greatly lower your vcore as well). Anytime you have more than a few percent of CPU load it will go to the max multiplier/clock until it drops back down. It doesn't take a lot. Prior to me unlinking the RAM from my Aura Lighting service it was using 3-4% CPU all the time, which was enough to keep all 8 cores at 5.1 GHz all the time. After fixing that I drop down as low as 800 MHz per core when idle.


except for core parking as a consequence of deep c-states.


----------



## encrypted11

IDF 2015 Keynote on SpeedShift


----------



## Jpmboy

and these


----------



## thrgk

Jpmboy said:


> cool - new board should resolve it. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


It's fixed! Not sure if not using the riser cable or the new mobo fixed it but it works. Only thing is when I click restart in windows, it doesn't boot from my m2, I have to go into the bios and click f10 and save and then it boots fine. I dont even see the m2 in boot override for some reason.

Thanks !!


----------



## Jpmboy

thrgk said:


> It's fixed! Not sure if not using the riser cable or the new mobo fixed it but it works. Only thing is when I click restart in windows, it doesn't boot from my m2, I have to go into the bios and click f10 and save and then it boots fine. I dont even see the m2 in boot override for some reason.
> 
> Thanks !!


it's in there - just change the HDD order first then select that drive in the boot order, F10. :thumb:


----------



## thrgk

Hmmm I only see 1 drive in boot override. It does identify all 3 sata ssd and my m2. I attached screenshots. Usually in asus extreme v bios, all drives showed in boot override




Jpmboy said:


> thrgk said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's fixed! Not sure if not using the riser cable or the new mobo fixed it but it works. Only thing is when I click restart in windows, it doesn't boot from my m2, I have to go into the bios and click f10 and save and then it boots fine. I dont even see the m2 in boot override for some reason.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks !!
> 
> 
> 
> it's in there - just change the HDD order first then select that drive in the boot order, F10. /forum/images/smilies/thumb.gif
Click to expand...


----------



## Jpmboy

thrgk said:


> Hmmm I only see 1 drive in boot override. It does identify all 3 sata ssd and my m2. I attached screenshots. Usually in asus extreme v bios, all drives showed in boot override


that's UEFI vs "Other OS" afaik. did you install the OS in UEFI mode or Other OS?


----------



## thrgk

Not sure, whatever was default I think. Should I format and make sure to use other OS? That's That's what it is currently set on.



Jpmboy said:


> thrgk said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm I only see 1 drive in boot override. It does identify all 3 sata ssd and my m2. I attached screenshots. Usually in asus extreme v bios, all drives showed in boot override
> 
> 
> 
> that's UEFI vs "Other OS" afaik. did you install the OS in UEFI mode or Other OS?
Click to expand...


----------



## bl4ckdot

Hello,
I think I may have an issue with my motherboard. I hear more and more frequently a popping sound, and from what I know about electronic, it's from a capacitor (80% sure). It happens when the system has more load than idle (like in a game). It sounds like this (



) but not that loud and not that frequent. It's very random.

Any idea ? Should I RMA the motherboard ? Is it something I can ignore ?

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

bl4ckdot said:


> Hello,
> I think I may have an issue with my motherboard. I hear more and more frequently a popping sound, and from what I know about electronic, it's from a capacitor (80% sure). It happens when the system has more load than idle (like in a game). It sounds like this (https://youtu.be/mVLScAMOsBs) but not that loud and not that frequent. It's very random.
> 
> Any idea ? Should I RMA the motherboard ? Is it something I can ignore ?
> 
> Thanks


no idea bud... is that thru the speakers? Is it a fan tick?


----------



## bl4ckdot

Jpmboy said:


> no idea bud... is that thru the speakers? Is it a fan tick?


Nope not a fan, that I'm 100% sure. I can hear it from outside of the case. I'll try to take a video of it so I can RMA it if needed.


----------



## Jpmboy

bl4ckdot said:


> Nope not a fan, that I'm 100% sure. I can hear it from outside of the case. I'll try to take a video of it so I can RMA it if needed.


how did you narrow in down to the MB? sometimes the EK loop can get a bubble in the pump...


----------



## bl4ckdot

Jpmboy said:


> how did you narrow in down to the MB? sometimes the EK loop can get a bubble in the pump...


Opened the case and tried for half an hour to locate the noise. At first I was thinking at the watercooling too but it's not. The pump is also running at 100% which does not correlate (I'm not sure if it's the right word) because the noise appears 95% of the time when the system has some loads, so the pump shouldn't change speed and somehow make a popping noise. I guess I'll do a second test run but I'm pretty positive at this point.


----------



## Jpmboy

It's an odd problem, probably best to ram once you double check the source.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Jpmboy said:


> It's an odd problem, probably best to ram once you double check the source.


Ok so this is the sound in question I managed to record : https://instaud.io/3cT4
My phone was like 30cm away from my case. We can hear the sound from pretty far (like 10+ meters if there is no ambiant noise).

There is a patern I noticed. When there is a pop, it's most of the time followed by 1 or 2 more pops. Like this : POP ... 2sec later POP .... 2sec later POP
Sometimes they are a bit quieter.

It seems more like an electronic sound than a mechanical sound if that make sens.

It seems to come from the top left corner of the motherboard (the side where there are the I/O)

It's very hard to reproduce as it seems very random, BUT always related to a change related to power in the PC : like loading a game or closing one. It never happen when my PC is on idle for example.


----------



## Jpmboy

try unplugging the network... and each connected device to see if one is the culprit... if you care to.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Unplugged everything except mouse, still happen. I don't think it's related to a peripheral.

Edit : tried without mouse, same thing. Not I/O related


----------



## chibi

Now do a barebone pc boot and test again.


----------



## bl4ckdot

It just happened after I shutdowned my PC, like 5 sec after my watercooling was completely stop. So it's clearly something electronic, not a moving part. 

This has to be the weirdest thing I ever saw with my PCs.


----------



## Falkentyne

bl4ckdot said:


> It just happened after I shutdowned my PC, like 5 sec after my watercooling was completely stop. So it's clearly something electronic, not a moving part.
> 
> This has to the weirdest thing I ever saw with my PCs.


Does it sound like a relay sound?
Is it coming from the power supply or the actual I/O area on the motherboard?
I know SOME boards have relays...

Ok I know that sound
I get that sound on my Gigabyte board when I first try to boot into bios or windows sometimes. But I never hear it again. I thought it was a fan catching on something like having too low RPM or something, like my Vega 64 fan. 
I'm guessing it's an electronic relay?
Maybe from the VRM area?


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah - some boards will "snap" on start up, my R4BE still does - it's the audio relay. But it's not a repetitive thing. Once (on start) and done. 'dot seems to have something else going on there. maybe best to break it down and test open-bench style if possible... then open a ticket if not already done.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Falkentyne said:


> Does it sound like a relay sound?
> Is it coming from the power supply or the actual I/O area on the motherboard?
> I know SOME boards have relays...
> 
> Ok I know that sound
> I get that sound on my Gigabyte board when I first try to boot into bios or windows sometimes. But I never hear it again. I thought it was a fan catching on something like having too low RPM or something, like my Vega 64 fan.
> I'm guessing it's an electronic relay?
> Maybe from the VRM area?


That's what I suspect too. I hear this sound (I think thats the same ? hard to tell) when I boot or stop my pc. It's not coming from my power supply, that I'm also certain. When I said I/O, I meant in that region of the motherboard, so yeah, maybe VRM related, I don't know enough


----------



## GeneO

bl4ckdot said:


> Ok so this is the sound in question I managed to record : https://instaud.io/3cT4
> My phone was like 30cm away from my case. We can hear the sound from pretty far (like 10+ meters if there is no ambiant noise).
> 
> There is a patern I noticed. When there is a pop, it's most of the time followed by 1 or 2 more pops. Like this : POP ... 2sec later POP .... 2sec later POP
> Sometimes they are a bit quieter.
> 
> It seems more like an electronic sound than a mechanical sound if that make sens.
> 
> It seems to come from the top left corner of the motherboard (the side where there are the I/O)
> 
> It's very hard to reproduce as it seems very random, BUT always related to a change related to power in the PC : like loading a game or closing one. It never happen when my PC is on idle for example.



One source of intermittent clicking could be the Seasonic hybrid mode fan circuitry, but I doubt you'd be reaching temperatures to activate it. Anyhow, it could persist after shutting down as the PSU cools. Easy to test if you are using Hybrid mode, turn it off. 



It could also be some component shifting from thermal expansion/contraction.


----------



## gebyz

Hey all, I have a strange issue that I did not notice before. I have two 1080Ti's in SLI and I just noticed that they are running in a x8/x4 instead of a x8/x8 config. I for the life of me cannot figure it out. I cleared CMOS, updated the bios, reseated the cards yet I cannot get them to show up x8/x8. I do have a single NVME drive but as the pictures show they are running off the chipset.

Can you help me understand this issue?

Specs:

8700K 5.0GHz 1.34v | ROG X Formula | Custom Loop | 1080Ti FTW3 SLI | 32GB G.Skill


----------



## GeneO

Nm


----------



## gebyz

GeneO said:


> If you are using either of the two onboard m.2 sockets, it is going to use 4 of the processor's 16 pci-e lanes.


Wouldn't it use the chipset lanes, from everything I read it should. If you look at my screenshots via HWINFO it shows only the two GPU's using the lanes off the CPU.


----------



## GeneO

gebyz said:


> GeneO said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you are using either of the two onboard m.2 sockets, it is going to use 4 of the processor's 16 pci-e lanes.
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't it use the chipset lanes, from everything I read it should. If you look at my screenshots via HWINFO it shows only the two GPU's using the lanes off the CPU.
Click to expand...

Yes, I was mistaken. I looked at a table in my code manual that was for a specific add In card, not the on board sockets.


----------



## bl4ckdot

GeneO said:


> One source of intermittent clicking could be the Seasonic hybrid mode fan circuitry, but I doubt you'd be reaching temperatures to activate it. Anyhow, it could persist after shutting down as the PSU cools. Easy to test if you are using Hybrid mode, turn it off.
> 
> 
> 
> It could also be some component shifting from thermal expansion/contraction.


Already tried, nothing. 
The noise isn't coming from the PSU, it's also in a different compartiment of the case and so it's very easy to differentiate sounds.

I opened a ticket yesterday, we will see

UPDATE : The vendor has accepted the RMA, now I need to disassemble everything and send it back :who-let-r


----------



## Jpmboy

bl4ckdot said:


> Already tried, nothing.
> The noise isn't coming from the PSU, it's also in a different compartiment of the case and so it's very easy to differentiate sounds.
> 
> I opened a ticket yesterday, we will see
> 
> UPDATE : The vendor has accepted the RMA, *now I need to disassemble everything and send it back* :who-let-r


this is why ya do thorough testing before... 'cause it's a PIA! :thumb:


----------



## bl4ckdot

Jpmboy said:


> this is why ya do thorough testing before... 'cause it's a PIA! :thumb:


I mean .. everything worked perfectly for a year  I should not complain, that's life ^^


----------



## Jpmboy

bl4ckdot said:


> I mean .. everything worked perfectly for a year  I should not complain, that's life ^^


should work perfectly for years. Look at it this way... gives you an excuse to clean out the dustbunnies.


----------



## wingman99

gebyz said:


> Hey all, I have a strange issue that I did not notice before. I have two 1080Ti's in SLI and I just noticed that they are running in a x8/x4 instead of a x8/x8 config. I for the life of me cannot figure it out. I cleared CMOS, updated the bios, reseated the cards yet I cannot get them to show up x8/x8. I do have a single NVME drive but as the pictures show they are running off the chipset.
> 
> Can you help me understand this issue?
> 
> Specs:
> 
> 8700K 5.0GHz 1.34v | ROG X Formula | Custom Loop | 1080Ti FTW3 SLI | 32GB G.Skill


You do have the video cards in the first two slots?


----------



## gebyz

wingman99 said:


> You do have the video cards in the first two slots?


Yup









Sent from my SM-N960W using Tapatalk


----------



## wingman99

gebyz said:


> Yup
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-N960W using Tapatalk


Try swap Video cards when reseating. Sometimes the Pins in the PCI-E slot get stuck away from the tracers on the card.


----------



## KedarWolf

gebyz said:


> Hey all, I have a strange issue that I did not notice before. I have two 1080Ti's in SLI and I just noticed that they are running in a x8/x4 instead of a x8/x8 config. I for the life of me cannot figure it out. I cleared CMOS, updated the bios, reseated the cards yet I cannot get them to show up x8/x8. I do have a single NVME drive but as the pictures show they are running off the chipset.
> 
> Can you help me understand this issue?
> 
> Specs:
> 
> 8700K 5.0GHz 1.34v | ROG X Formula | Custom Loop | 1080Ti FTW3 SLI | 32GB G.Skill


Bent pins in the CPU socket can make you lose PCI-e lanes. I've had it happen to me.


----------



## gebyz

KedarWolf said:


> Bent pins in the CPU socket can make you lose PCI-e lanes. I've had it happen to me.


I'll give it a look. I just got my 9900k today anyways. 

Sent from my SM-N960W using Tapatalk


----------



## gebyz

Just to update in case anyone else has this issue in the future, I cleaned the PCIE fingers with isopropyl and I got my GPU's to show up in a x8/x8 setting!

Thanks for the help.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

gebyz said:


> I'll give it a look. I just got my 9900k today anyways.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N960W using Tapatalk


Or a little bit of thermal paste on the gold connectors on the CPU, had that happen to me when I delidded my wife's 7700k, didn't notice I had a spec on my finger, when I put the CPU back into the motherboard it would only boot with 1 Ram stick in, took out the cpu and saw the spec covering a gold contacted, cleaned it off, worked perfectly.
Then I did a forehead slap, called myself a few names, and laughed, first time for everything


----------



## ssateneth

I'm getting irritated at the lack of availability of Z390 APEX in north america. Many of those EU merchants won't ship to USA. Even if I do find an overseas merchant to sell to me, what about ASUS warranty? I know Gigabyte is terrible with warranty if you buy something overseas (they'll flat out deny warranty if you try to send in an EU board to a USA repair center for some reason). I don't want ASUS to pull the same trick on me too.

Anyone know where a NA guy can buy a Z390 APEX board right now at a reasonable price and still get warranty?


----------



## jelome1989

ssateneth said:


> I'm getting irritated at the lack of availability of Z390 APEX in north america. Many of those EU merchants won't ship to USA. Even if I do find an overseas merchant to sell to me, what about ASUS warranty? I know Gigabyte is terrible with warranty if you buy something overseas (they'll flat out deny warranty if you try to send in an EU board to a USA repair center for some reason). I don't want ASUS to pull the same trick on me too.
> 
> Anyone know where a NA guy can buy a Z390 APEX board right now at a reasonable price and still get warranty?


You're not alone. I've been waiting for this board since last year, getting irritated is way past me. But not to mention, in my case, its worse, as I'm in Asia. I asked our local retailers here and Asus themselves and they told me Asus have no plans for the Apex in my country. (What's worse is they've announced that the Gene is 'coming' early this year, but no availability until now, even retailers have no ETA)

I have no choice but to buy the Apex internationally from Amazon or Newegg. That would delay the board for a few more weeks. Although I have a relative in the US who's going back to our country this February and willing to buy the board for me, but given the delay I don't think I'll be able to get him the board.


----------



## ViTosS

Guys I don't know how to solve this, but even when I set AC Power Loss Recover setting in BIOS to ''Power Off'', when I have power outrage/power loss and then when the power is back on (usually I have a 3~5s of power off in my region when it's raining and winding), the PC is instantly turned back on, I think my mobo is faulty in this aspect, I also changed Windows setting to make sure it doesn't happen, but it happens, and when I have power loss and the power is back on in like 3s and this keep happening, my PC is constantly turning on and off all the time, I want it to stay turned off when I have power loss, what should I do?

Also one more question, my Secure Boot thing setting is set to ''Other OS'', but I installed my Windows from an UEFI GPT mode pen drive, but the default setting in BIOS is ''Other OS'', I need to change to UEFI or it is fine that way? Does it change something in terms of performance? How can I make sure I have an UEFI installation?


----------



## GeneO

Can't help with the first, sounds like a MB or BIOS issue. I use it with no issues on my Code X.



For the second, if you have it set to other OS it won't secure boot to Windows. You use that (default) setting to disable secure boot.


----------



## ViTosS

GeneO said:


> Can't help with the first, sounds like a MB or BIOS issue. I use it with no issues on my Code X.
> 
> 
> 
> For the second, if you have it set to other OS it won't secure boot to Windows. You use that (default) setting to disable secure boot.


Yea I tried all the 3 settings and my PC keep turning back on when the power is back, idk...

And for the second, you recommend to keep it at default (Other OS) or change to UEFI?


----------



## GeneO

ViTosS said:


> GeneO said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can't help with the first, sounds like a MB or BIOS issue. I use it with no issues on my Code X.
> 
> 
> 
> For the second, if you have it set to other OS it won't secure boot to Windows. You use that (default) setting to disable secure boot.
> 
> 
> 
> Yea I tried all the 3 settings and my PC keep turning back on when the power is back, idk...
> 
> And for the second, you recommend to keep it at default (Other OS) or change to UEFI?
Click to expand...

I have it enabled - it really can't hurt.


----------



## TheLastHero

So I just updated to the latest 1802 bios for the Z370-F, and it's totally screwed up. Even at default values, running IBT on "very high" (which is pretty standard), ramps up the cpu temp to over 90C.....this is with ZERO overclock....what the hells going on here? Getting back to 4.8ghz is totally out of the question now. Think I was on bios version 1412 prior to this.


----------



## Falkentyne

TheLastHero said:


> So I just updated to the latest 1802 bios for the Z370-F, and it's totally screwed up. Even at default values, running IBT on "very high" (which is pretty standard), ramps up the cpu temp to over 90C.....this is with ZERO overclock....what the hells going on here? Getting back to 4.8ghz is totally out of the question now. Think I was on bios version 1412 prior to this.


What's the cache ratio set to?


----------



## TheLastHero

Whatever "auto" is, 255.75 I'm assuming? I used the load default values setting in the bios, and tried stress testing it just to see. Of course it's overheating at stock, which doesn't make any sense. I tried inputting all my old OC settings, and it's just as bad if not worse during testing. CPU temp ramps up to like 96C and just freezes. I thought I had changed something that I shouldn't have, to cause that high temp/instability.....but everything was bang on


----------



## Falkentyne

TheLastHero said:


> Whatever "auto" is, 255.75 I'm assuming? I used the load default values setting in the bios, and tried stress testing it just to see. Of course it's overheating at stock, which doesn't make any sense. I tried inputting all my old OC settings, and it's just as bad if not worse during testing. CPU temp ramps up to like 96C and just freezes. I thought I had changed something that I shouldn't have, to cause that high temp/instability.....but everything was bang on


I said cache ratio not current limit 
Usually cache ratio is set to 3 below core ratio. (Cache=Ring). Sometimes its preset to x43. Some boards set it to x47 on early bios. CPU VID is based purely on the cache ratio.


----------



## wingman99

TheLastHero said:


> Whatever "auto" is, 255.75 I'm assuming? I used the load default values setting in the bios, and tried stress testing it just to see. Of course it's overheating at stock, which doesn't make any sense. I tried inputting all my old OC settings, and it's just as bad if not worse during testing. CPU temp ramps up to like 96C and just freezes. I thought I had changed something that I shouldn't have, to cause that high temp/instability.....but everything was bang on


I would check to see if the Corsair H100i V2 Liquid cooler is malfunctioning.


----------



## TheLastHero

wingman99 said:


> I would check to see if the Corsair H100i V2 Liquid cooler is malfunctioning.


Seems to be running fine.

Been messing around with the OC settings. Got it at 47 multiplier, and 1.3v vcore. Still breaking 100C on IBT, LLC is set to 6

Pump is running at 100% on the cooler, rad fans 55%


----------



## ViTosS

I'm using the last BIOS for Maximus X Hero, and since the first BIOS I used, my OC kept the same (voltage, frequency, memory OC, etc), no change at all I had to do in voltages and stuff


----------



## TheLastHero

ViTosS said:


> I'm using the last BIOS for Maximus X Hero, and since the first BIOS I used, my OC kept the same (voltage, frequency, memory OC, etc), no change at all I had to do in voltages and stuff


This is why I was weary of updating the bios, cause I had a feeling something like this would happen:thumbsdow


----------



## Jpmboy

ViTosS said:


> Guys I don't know how to solve this, but even when I set AC Power Loss Recover setting in BIOS to ''Power Off'', when I have power outrage/power loss and then when the power is back on (usually I have a 3~5s of power off in my region when it's raining and winding), the PC is instantly turned back on, I think my mobo is faulty in this aspect, I also changed Windows setting to make sure it doesn't happen, but it happens, and when I have power loss and the power is back on in like 3s and this keep happening, my PC is constantly turning on and off all the time, I want it to stay turned off when I have power loss, what should I do?
> 
> Also one more question, my Secure Boot thing setting is set to ''Other OS'', but I installed my Windows from an UEFI GPT mode pen drive, but the default setting in BIOS is ''Other OS'', I need to change to UEFI or it is fine that way? Does it change something in terms of performance? How can I make sure I have an UEFI installation?


first check that any attached USB devices do not have permission to "Wake" or POwer on the PC in device manager (for every USB dev or port, uncheck this box in the POwer Management tab. This is most likey causing the rig to power up once power is restored.


TheLastHero said:


> So I just updated to the latest 1802 bios for the Z370-F, and it's totally screwed up. Even at default values, running IBT on "very high" (which is pretty standard), ramps up the cpu temp to over 90C.....this is with ZERO overclock....what the hells going on here? Getting back to 4.8ghz is totally out of the question now. Think I was on bios version 1412 prior to this.





TheLastHero said:


> This is why I was weary of updating the bios, cause I had a feeling something like this would happen:thumbsdow



Flash back to the bios that was working correctly.


----------



## MrYakuZa

TheLastHero said:


> So I just updated to the latest 1802 bios for the Z370-F, and it's totally screwed up. Even at default values, running IBT on "very high" (which is pretty standard), ramps up the cpu temp to over 90C.....this is with ZERO overclock....what the hells going on here? Getting back to 4.8ghz is totally out of the question now. Think I was on bios version 1412 prior to this.



I update my Z370F this afternoon and it's going great, I've set the same settings that I had with the previous one ( 1002 bios ) and I'd say that I got less voltage from this bios version.
Maybe the batch of your cpu has gone bad, maybe is your cooler ( mine is custom WC with 4 HW BLACK ICE SR 480 - 360 - 240 - 120 ) or the same is because mine has delid.

I pass the stress video of about 30 minutes at 5GHz with the Aida64 Extreme.
The last 5 min of the video, of course not the entire 30 minutes.


----------



## ViTosS

Jpmboy said:


> first check that any attached USB devices do not have permission to "Wake" or POwer on the PC in device manager (for every USB dev or port, uncheck this box in the POwer Management tab. This is most likey causing the rig to power up once power is restored.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flash back to the bios that was working correctly.


Alright, I've set all the USB devices (keyboard, mouse and Xbox One controller) to that, will test later


----------



## Jpmboy

ViTosS said:


> Alright, I've set all the USB devices (keyboard, mouse and Xbox One controller) to that, will test later


I'd deselect this option for the hubs and for the "human interface" devices  ... keyboards and mice listed in devmngr to see if it is an attached device. Also, in bios under USB you can disable "Allow this device to power on the computer... just for belts and suspenders while trying to root the cause.


----------



## guitarmageddon88

Maximus x code....what's the consensus on the latest 1802 bios (I think that's the number). All is well? I'm on 1704 with a perfect adaptive overclock. I don't want to upset her.....


----------



## ViTosS

Jpmboy said:


> I'd deselect this option for the hubs and for the "human interface" devices  ... keyboards and mice listed in devmngr to see if it is an attached device. Also, in bios under USB you can disable "Allow this device to power on the computer... just for belts and suspenders while trying to root the cause.


Disabling all these options in Device Manager didn't fix the problem , also I didn't find anything in USB settings in BIOS related to that...


----------



## Jpmboy

ViTosS said:


> *Disabling all these options in Device Manager didn't fix the problem* , also I didn't find anything in USB settings in BIOS related to that...


damn. 



the bios settings may not be in the USB menu.. they are in there somewhere tho. I can;t look in my z390 or z370 right now. but will later.


----------



## Falkentyne

ViTosS said:


> Guys I don't know how to solve this, but even when I set AC Power Loss Recover setting in BIOS to ''Power Off'', when I have power outrage/power loss and then when the power is back on (usually I have a 3~5s of power off in my region when it's raining and winding), the PC is instantly turned back on, I think my mobo is faulty in this aspect, I also changed Windows setting to make sure it doesn't happen, but it happens, and when I have power loss and the power is back on in like 3s and this keep happening, my PC is constantly turning on and off all the time, I want it to stay turned off when I have power loss, what should I do?
> 
> Also one more question, my Secure Boot thing setting is set to ''Other OS'', but I installed my Windows from an UEFI GPT mode pen drive, but the default setting in BIOS is ''Other OS'', I need to change to UEFI or it is fine that way? Does it change something in terms of performance? How can I make sure I have an UEFI installation?


What happens if you turn off the power supply when in windows (make sure there is no disk access first), then wait 15 seconds, then turn the power supply switch back on?
Then try the exact same thing with AC Power loss recover set to "Auto on"?

Perhaps the option is simply bugged and not working at all ?


----------



## Robostyle

ssateneth said:


> I'm getting irritated at the lack of availability of Z390 APEX in north america. Many of those EU merchants won't ship to USA. Even if I do find an overseas merchant to sell to me, what about ASUS warranty? I know Gigabyte is terrible with warranty if you buy something overseas (they'll flat out deny warranty if you try to send in an EU board to a USA repair center for some reason). I don't want ASUS to pull the same trick on me too.
> 
> Anyone know where a NA guy can buy a Z390 APEX board right now at a reasonable price and still get warranty?


asus warranty is waaaay awfull. I've bought my 1080 Ti in Estonia. When back home, I've tried reaching local asus - they've just screwed me over, implying that gpu was shipped for Poland, so I can go......for walk. 
Lol, Polaks are next to my country, what't the damn difference?  All this still counts as eu region, isn't it?
Still, they've refused me in any warranty support. Poor estonians, they don't have a chance for warranty at all. 

I suppose it's gonna be even more hopeless, to try warranty for eu goods in america.


----------



## ViTosS

Falkentyne said:


> What happens if you turn off the power supply when in windows (make sure there is no disk access first), then wait 15 seconds, then turn the power supply switch back on?
> Then try the exact same thing with AC Power loss recover set to "Auto on"?
> 
> Perhaps the option is simply bugged and not working at all ?


I tried pulling the power cord from AC, waited like 5s and plugged again and the PC instantly boot and turns on again, also the 3 available options is Power On, Power Off and Last State, I tried all the 3 and all of them I have the same problem.


----------



## Falkentyne

ViTosS said:


> I tried pulling the power cord from AC, waited like 5s and plugged again and the PC instantly boot and turns on again, also the 3 available options is Power On, Power Off and Last State, I tried all the 3 and all of them I have the same problem.


What happens if you wait 30 seconds?


----------



## ViTosS

Falkentyne said:


> What happens if you wait 30 seconds?


Will try that later today and report back, but I presume it won't boot when the power is back, at least I hope...


----------



## Jpmboy

ViTosS said:


> I tried pulling the power cord from AC, waited like 5s and plugged again and the PC instantly boot and turns on again, also the 3 available options is Power On, Power Off and Last State, I tried all the 3 and all of them I have the same problem.


if the board is in a case, disconnect the case switch from the header and see if it automatically starts from an AC power cycle. Finally, it may actually be the power supply if it starts up from a plug pull but not when you cycle the PSU power switch... In all the testing, leave the APM setting "restore AC power loss" to "POwer Off", disable by PCIE and by RTC. Disable Fast Boot in boot\configuration. ??


----------



## ViTosS

Jpmboy said:


> if the board is in a case, disconnect the case switch from the header and see if it automatically starts from an AC power cycle. Finally, it may actually be the power supply if it starts up from a plug pull but not when you cycle the PSU power switch... In all the testing, leave the APM setting "restore AC power loss" to "POwer Off", disable by PCIE and by RTC. Disable Fast Boot in boot\configuration. ??


I will remove the power plug from header and test again, what do you mean by AC power cycle? Also I have fast boot disabled because some audio cracking problems with Z370 Maximus X Hero I had in the past, that disabling fast boot fixed it.


----------



## Jpmboy

ViTosS said:


> I will remove the power plug from header and test again, *what do you mean by AC power cycle*? Also I have fast boot disabled because some audio cracking problems with Z370 Maximus X Hero I had in the past, that disabling fast boot fixed it.


wall plug pull or PSU switch off... what you did before to cause it to auto start (not stay off after a power failure). :thumb:


----------



## ViTosS

Jpmboy said:


> wall plug pull or PSU switch off... what you did before to cause it to auto start (not stay off after a power failure). :thumb:


Well I tried the PSU switch off and the same problem, last try will be the 30s waiting and removing the headers from power for I/O


----------



## Jpmboy

ViTosS said:


> Well I tried the PSU switch off and the same problem, last try will be the 30s waiting and removing the headers from power for I/O


yeah, gonna be hard to know whether it is the PSU or MB without changing either.


----------



## Nilsagard

Can anyone fix a custom bios for Maximus X (non wifi) based on 1801 and ME Firmware on bios 1101?

https://www.asus.com/se/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO/HelpDesk_BIOS/


----------



## KedarWolf

Nilsagard said:


> Can anyone fix a custom bios for Maximus X (non wifi) based on 1801 and ME Firmware on bios 1101?
> 
> https://www.asus.com/se/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO/HelpDesk_BIOS/


I can make you a 1101 BIOS for you with the latest microcode, RST firmware etc. but to get the latest ME firmware you need to flash that separately.


----------



## Nilsagard

Oh ok thanks 

I do not want the latest ME firmware as that destroys my OC.

Is it possible to to use 1101 with everything BUT the latest ME? I want .3399 (or what it was called)

Edit;
And installation process is flash back I guess..

Edit again;
What I mean is that I want bios 1801 with the .3399 ME firmware


----------



## Martin778

What's the story behind the Vcore on Z390 Apex, it looks like it's much higher than what it reports - 1.20V LLC=6 set in BIOS reads 1.19V in HWInfo and drops under load to 1.14V , yet Cinebench still passes but 5.0GHz @ 1.14 is unreal. 
I know it's a very strong chip that did 5.2GHz 1.28V stable on the Taichi in non-AVX (1h of RB and P95 26.6) but this is questionable at least.
I've noticed that my temps were much higher on the Apex than on the Taichi when using the same Vcore. 

The board is very good (I've managed 4800 CL18 on RAM for a bench) very stable but that's cheating and unfair compared to other manufacturers...
https://i.imgur.com/pDR69mH.png


----------



## Telstar

Martin778 said:


> What's the story behind the Vcore on Z390 Apex, it looks like it's much higher than what it reports...


AFAIK cpu-z reports it correctly.
You could always use a DMM on the mainboard measurement points.


----------



## Martin778

CPU-Z shows exactly the same thing HWinfo64 displays. They all report wrong values, it cannot be that a 9900K passes LinX at 5GHz 1.12V (after Vdroop). No way on earth.
Even solid 1.19V is too low for that. When you take the 100mV into account it suddenly becomes plausible on a good chip, it would mean 1.29V idle and ~1.22V load IF it scales linear.


----------



## Falkentyne

Martin778 said:


> What's the story behind the Vcore on Z390 Apex, it looks like it's much higher than what it reports - 1.20V LLC=6 set in BIOS reads 1.19V in HWInfo and drops under load to 1.14V , yet Cinebench still passes but 5.0GHz @ 1.14 is unreal.
> I know it's a very strong chip that did 5.2GHz 1.28V stable on the Taichi in non-AVX (1h of RB and P95 26.6) but this is questionable at least.
> I've noticed that my temps were much higher on the Apex than on the Taichi when using the same Vcore.
> 
> The board is very good (I've managed 4800 CL18 on RAM for a bench) very stable but that's cheating and unfair compared to other manufacturers...
> https://i.imgur.com/pDR69mH.png


Your chip is golden. Linpack at 1.14v is not unbelievable. Look at your CPU VID. It's reading at 1.14v at 4.7 ghz (ring). Most chips are usually around 1.2v here. Now if your VID were higher, then yes I would agree that something were not right. But it checks up.
It's just a golden chip. You're doing 5 ghz at the same voltage that most others do 4.7 ghz at.


----------



## Martin778

Not necessarily, the Apex makes my CPU run way hotter than Taichi at the same voltage though, that's what caught my eye. I was like - 90*C in Cinebench at 1.25V...EH?! Then I lowered it and finally the temps equalled these I got on the Taichi.


----------



## KedarWolf

Nilsagard said:


> Oh ok thanks
> 
> I do not want the latest ME firmware as that destroys my OC.
> 
> Is it possible to to use 1101 with everything BUT the latest ME? I want .3399 (or what it was called)
> 
> Edit;
> And installation process is flash back I guess..
> 
> Edit again;
> What I mean is that I want bios 1801 with the .3399 ME firmware


What you want is the 1101 BIOS with the latest microcode for Spectre mitigation and then flash the ME back to 3399.


----------



## Martin778

Is the 100mV offset present at all times or is there another hidden switch for it?  I've set my CPU for testing purposes @ 1.17V 4500MHz and it pulls 200W in LinX. VERY unlikely.


----------



## Falkentyne

Martin778 said:


> Is the 100mV offset present at all times or is there another hidden switch for it?  I've set my CPU for testing purposes @ 1.17V 4500MHz and it pulls 200W in LinX. VERY unlikely.


1) there is no such thing as a 100mv offset, period. Just because Asus is no longer using Super I/O chip for voltage measurement and is using CPU on-die sense does NOT mean there is a 100mv offset. It means it's more accurate than in the past.

2) It's showing 200W because your CPU VID is *HIGHER* than your cpu vcore. CPU package power is PURELY related to CPU VID * current. If you want the true power consumption, look in the VR sensor area, if possible, for current and power coming from the VRM's.


----------



## Martin778

My Vcore isn't set lower than my VID and I can clearly see 85*C on my CPU which makes the 200W reading very plausible. Yes my cooler is seated well because I see how quick the liquid temp is rising, before someone asks.
The Vcore readings are totally all over the place, like 0.08Vdroop at LLC=6. On stock the board sets ~1.10Vcore at 4.7Ghz and that drops to 0.95V under load. This is NOT possible, never ever. Try setting the same 1.10V yourself, won't post. 1.15 then? Nope. Every monitoring program reports the same results.
How would you explain my CPU needing 1.28V on a taichi for non-AVX 5.2 stability, even at the highest LLC but only ~1.20V on the ASUS with LLC=6 yet the CPU thermals are higher on ASUS? When I set Fixed Voltage 1.28V on the ASUS the CPU went bananas with thermals. Magic?

I will try reflashing the BIOS and otherwise sending it back because it's doing things out of control. Another 'invention' nobody needed or even asked for and which is now plaguing the whole overclocking community because people call their 5.0 1.15V chips 'golden' whilst on other manufacturer's board they'd easily need another .1V to run stable.


----------



## Falkentyne

Martin778 said:


> My Vcore isn't set lower than my VID and I can clearly see 85*C on my CPU which makes the 200W reading very plausible. Yes my cooler is seated well because I see how quick the liquid temp is rising, before someone asks.
> The Vcore readings are totally all over the place, like 0.08Vdroop at LLC=6. On stock the board sets ~1.10Vcore at 4.7Ghz and that drops to 0.95V under load. This is NOT possible, never ever. Try setting the same 1.10V yourself, won't post. 1.15 then? Nope. Every monitoring program reports the same results.
> How would you explain my CPU needing 1.28V on a taichi for non-AVX 5.2 stability, even at the highest LLC but only ~1.20V on the ASUS with LLC=6 yet the CPU thermals are higher on ASUS? When I set Fixed Voltage 1.28V on the ASUS the CPU went bananas with thermals. Magic?
> 
> I will try reflashing the BIOS and otherwise sending it back because it's doing things out of control. Another 'invention' nobody needed or even asked for and which is now plaguing the whole overclocking community because people call their 5.0 1.15V chips 'golden' whilst on other manufacturer's board they'd easily need another .1V to run stable.


The 1.28v on a Taichi is SIO voltage. 
The 1.20v on the Asus is CPU On-die sense.


----------



## Nilsagard

I actually do not want the new specter stuff at all, if that affect my oc (really do not think specter etc is an issue for "normal" home users).
I found later bioses managed higher mem OC thant he earlier, but the older ones made my cpu to handle higher cpu oc.

The ME fimware really mess with my oc, thefore i belive that .3399 is the one to go with.

Do you belive it is the bios version or the micro code that affect mem and cpu oc? ME firmware is confirmed to mess things up


----------



## Telstar

@Martin778 I think that you are over-reacting. The Apex xi is doing nothing wrong.
The higher temps and power is due to higher vccio and vssia that you are using now to keep the memory high. Set it at let's say 3600 c16 with 1,15 on both and retest,


----------



## Jpmboy

Martin778 said:


> *What's the story behind the Vcore on Z390 Apex,* it looks like it's much higher than what it reports - 1.20V LLC=6 set in BIOS reads 1.19V in HWInfo and drops under load to 1.14V , yet Cinebench still passes but 5.0GHz @ 1.14 is unreal.
> I know it's a very strong chip that did 5.2GHz 1.28V stable on the Taichi in non-AVX (1h of RB and P95 26.6) but this is questionable at least.
> I've noticed that my temps were much higher on the Apex than on the Taichi when using the same Vcore.
> 
> The board is very good (I've managed 4800 CL18 on RAM for a bench) very stable but that's cheating and unfair compared to other manufacturers...
> https://i.imgur.com/pDR69mH.png


measure it off the board with a DMM and not using software-based tools that likely have not been updated for the new components... in addition to the different in the way the ASUS board's report vcore to the OS.


----------



## encrypted11

Martin778 said:


> What's the story behind the Vcore on Z390 Apex, it looks like it's much higher than what it reports - 1.20V LLC=6 set in BIOS reads 1.19V in HWInfo and drops under load to 1.14V , yet Cinebench still passes but 5.0GHz @ 1.14 is unreal.
> I know it's a very strong chip that did 5.2GHz 1.28V stable on the Taichi in non-AVX (1h of RB and P95 26.6) but this is questionable at least.
> I've noticed that my temps were much higher on the Apex than on the Taichi when using the same Vcore.
> 
> The board is very good (I've managed 4800 CL18 on RAM for a bench) very stable but that's cheating and unfair compared to other manufacturers...
> https://i.imgur.com/pDR69mH.png



There are captions in english. Video by ROG R&D Engineer Bing L.





Who's Bing L, brief mentions by elmor awhile ago.


----------



## Luck100

encrypted11 said:


> There are captions in english. Video by ROG R&D Engineer Bing L.


Great video, thanks for linking that! This is exactly what Asus have been saying all along. Nice to see it with the multimeters.


----------



## Martin778

Every other manufacturer can do it the normal way, with working software, everyone is happy. This has been fine for at least 10+ years.

Then come ASUS engineers with their "more accurate" and they throw every possible software reading into the garbage bin and now no one knows what the true voltage reading is and what to set the board to because when I set 1.2V and get higher thermals than board set to 1.28V I can assure you it's not outputting anywhere near 1.20V to the CPU.

Is it 1989 that I have to measure the voltages with a DMM? Maybe I need to connect my oscilloscope and curve tracer too?


----------



## Nikos4Life

I have recently bought a binned 5.1GHz 9900K and while I am waiting for it to arrive I have to decide the motherboard. 

At first, the Asus Maximus XI Extreme is on the lead because it is the best all-around for my needs I/O expansions and so on. But I am concerned about its VRM. 
Will be enough to push the 9900K to higher clocks without worrying about them? 

Other options which I am considering would be:

EVGA Z390 Dark (if It ever ships to EU)
Asus Apex 

Motherboards with only two DDR4 slots are not my first options since I would have to buy 2 sticks for it. As I want 32GB of RAM on that system. And right now I do have 4x8 RAM modules waiting there. 
But at the end of the day if VRM compromises the rest of the system I do not mind to buy them.

I am open to other options anyone could throw it here.

Cooling is not going to be a problem (for CPU).

Thanks for your advice.

Kind Regards,
Nikos


----------



## Martin778

It is not, I ran 1.20+ on the Asrock aswell.


----------



## Luck100

Martin778 said:


> Every other manufacturer can do it the normal way, with working software, everyone is happy. This has been fine for at least 10+ years.
> 
> Then come ASUS engineers with their "more accurate" and they throw every possible software reading into the garbage bin and now no one knows what the true voltage reading is and what to set the board to because when I set 1.2V and get higher thermals than board set to 1.28V I can assure you it's not outputting anywhere near 1.20V to the CPU.
> 
> Is it 1989 that I have to measure the voltages with a DMM? Maybe I need to connect my oscilloscope and curve tracer too?


Look at the video above. The new Asus vcore sensor matches the DMM almost perfectly at idle or load. The "good old" vcore sensor is way overstating voltage under load. Everybody has been working off inflated vcore numbers for a long time because we didn't have an accurate sensor.


----------



## elmor

Martin778 said:


> Every other manufacturer can do it the normal way, with working software, everyone is happy. This has been fine for at least 10+ years.
> 
> Then come ASUS engineers with their "more accurate" and they throw every possible software reading into the garbage bin and now no one knows what the true voltage reading is and what to set the board to because when I set 1.2V and get higher thermals than board set to 1.28V I can assure you it's not outputting anywhere near 1.20V to the CPU.
> 
> Is it 1989 that I have to measure the voltages with a DMM? Maybe I need to connect my oscilloscope and curve tracer too?



Just because everyone is doing it doesn't mean it's right. It is more accurate, no quotation marks required. You prefer that motherboard engineers tune the readings to an arbitrary value that looks good for them? The readings have become more and more erroneous because the output current has rapidly increased the past 1-2 years through the increased core count.


----------



## Martin778

But that way I can start posting the best 9900K on the planet that does 5.2 @ 1.2V which isn't true because it needs 1.28-1.3V for that (non AVX) on all other boards.

How am I supposed to read out the voltages now without having a DMM hanging out of the case? Why do I see 0.15Vdroop? Take a look, this is 4.7GHz:


----------



## Luck100

Falkentyne said:


> It's showing 200W because your CPU VID is *HIGHER* than your cpu vcore. CPU package power is PURELY related to CPU VID * current. If you want the true power consumption, look in the VR sensor area, if possible, for current and power coming from the VRM's.


Hey @Falkentyne, can you elaborate on this bit about the CPU package power reading in HWinfo? Are you really saying it's just VID*current? So it would meaningless if we set a manual voltage? Any sources you can point out for such information?

I've noticed that when I test different overclocks/voltages, I can get similar power package values at load (say 180W with Prime95 small) in two cases yet I'll have noticeably different load temperatures after 5 minutes. It does make me think the package power is inaccurate, though I'm not sure it agrees with your explanation either.


----------



## elmor

Martin778 said:


> But that way I can start posting the best 9900K on the planet that does 5.2 @ 1.2V which isn't true because it needs 1.28-1.3V for that (non AVX) on all other boards.
> 
> How am I supposed to read out the voltages now without having a DMM hanging out of the case? Why do I see 0.15Vdroop? Take a look, this is 4.7GHz:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuROyR2xLJE



Software is reading correctly (as long as you've updated it in the last few months). You can't compare voltages between boards unless they all use die-sense. It was the same before, each vendor would tune their voltage readings differently. Previously people thought Asrock Z170 boards could run lower voltage because they tuned it to show lower. Testing in the lab showed that there was no difference or maybe even worse.

edit: It's possible HWInfo has not been updated to use the correct voltage sense calculation yet, let me investigate.


----------



## Luck100

Martin778 said:


> But that way I can start posting the best 9900K on the planet that does 5.2 @ 1.2V which isn't true because it needs 1.28-1.3V for that (non AVX) on all other boards.
> 
> How am I supposed to read out the voltages now without having a DMM hanging out of the case? Why do I see 0.15Vdroop? Take a look, this is 4.7GHz:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuROyR2xLJE


That does look strange, very different from when I run it (Asus Maximus Xi Hero + 9900K). I certainly don't see any such massive drop in vcore under load. I was only able to try LinX 0.6.5, I couldn't find your version on any site I trusted.

What settings are you using in BIOS? I.e., what have you change from optimized defaults?
Which version of HWinfo are you using? Maybe you have an older version that doesn't read the Asus sensor correctly.


----------



## Martin778

I will check when I'm at home. This is was LLC6.
I was scared seeing drops from 1.29 to 1.20-1.21 at LLC=7 but it can't be right because 0.95V is simply wrong, it shouldn't even boot at that voltage. Probably 1.10V 4.7 wouldn't boot either.


----------



## elmor

Martin778 said:


> I will check when I'm at home. This is was LLC6.
> I was scared seeing drops from 1.29 to 1.20-1.21 at LLC=7 but it can't be right because 0.95V is simply wrong, it shouldn't even boot at that voltage. Probably 1.10V 4.7 wouldn't boot either.



I verified on HWInfo 6.01-3650 that it's reading correctly, it's possible your version is too old and reading lower than it should (1.11 times). 1.29V down to 1.20 at LLC=7 is perfectly normal though, assuming you set ~1.30V in BIOS.


----------



## Luck100

Martin778 said:


> I will check when I'm at home. This is was LLC6.
> I was scared seeing drops from 1.29 to 1.20-1.21 at LLC=7 but it can't be right because 0.95V is simply wrong, it shouldn't even boot at that voltage. Probably 1.10V 4.7 wouldn't boot either.


I see 1.17 Vcore idle, 1.146 under load when I run your LinX test (0.6.5 version, not your version). Vcore is read from HWinfo latest version (not the beta). I'm only getting 322 GFlops when I run LinX versus your 461, so there may be some substantial difference between the versions.

I'm running all cores at 4.7 GHz with offset voltage, LLC 5, and XMP profile:

Ai Overclock Tuner [XMP I]
XMP [XMP DDR4-3200 16-18-18-36-1.35V]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
ASUS MultiCore Enhancement [Disabled]
AVX Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [0]
CPU Core Ratio [Sync All Cores]
1-Core Ratio Limit [47]
DRAM Frequency [DDR4-3200MHz]
DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay [18]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [36]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 5]
Long Duration Package Power Limit [4095]
Package Power Time Window [127]
Short Duration Package Power Limit [4095]
CPU Core/Cache Current Limit Max. [255.75]
CPU Core/Cache Voltage [Offset Mode]
- Offset Mode Sign [+]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.030]
DRAM Voltage [1.3500]
CPU VCCIO Voltage [1.15000]
CPU System Agent Voltage [1.10000]


----------



## Martin778

LinX is pretty weird, it took me days to find out the perfect primary/secondary RAM timing combination that pulled 460 GFLOPS.
When I revert to UEFI Defaults, thus 2133MHz JEDEC RAM and everything AUTO I'm getting around 290 GFLOPS. After I setup XMP it's around 320.

You can also clearly see it on the temps/power draw, if I tried to run LinX on 5.0-5.2GHz with optimized timings, it would smash the Tjmax and output like 500 GFLOPS whilst on XMP the temps would still be like 85-88*C tops and around 300GFLOPS.


+
It was HWInfo64 6.00, latest official release.

I've just tried 1.23V manual and readouts from the latest HWInfo64 6.01 beta. Under Cinebench it drops to 1.17V and when you smash it with AVX SmallFFT's it drops further to 1.14V. Still a bit much isn't it?


----------



## Jpmboy

Nikos4Life said:


> I have recently bought a binned 5.1GHz 9900K and while I am waiting for it to arrive I have to decide the motherboard.
> 
> At first, the Asus Maximus XI Extreme is on the lead because it is the best all-around for my needs I/O expansions and so on. But I am concerned about its VRM.
> Will be enough to push the 9900K to higher clocks without worrying about them?
> 
> Other options which I am considering would be:
> 
> EVGA Z390 Dark (if It ever ships to EU)
> Asus Apex
> 
> Motherboards with only two DDR4 slots are not my first options since I would have to buy 2 sticks for it. As I want 32GB of RAM on that system. And right now I do have 4x8 RAM modules waiting there.
> But at the end of the day if VRM compromises the rest of the system I do not mind to buy them.
> 
> I am open to other options anyone could throw it here.
> 
> Cooling is not going to be a problem (for CPU).
> 
> Thanks for your advice.
> 
> Kind Regards,
> Nikos


I'm running the Max Xi right now and it is working beautifully. The VRM is holding at 32C while running Boinc (universe cpu calc) at 5.0 and 1.32V (lol, measured and reads in HWi and right on the LiveDash. If you want to or can use 4 ram slots, go with the Max XI... otherwise If the Apex XI is anything like the Apex IX or Apex X, that's gonna be a killer MB. 




elmor said:


> Software is reading correctly (as long as you've updated it in the last few months). You can't compare voltages between boards unless they all use die-sense. It was the same before, each vendor would tune their voltage readings differently. Previously people thought Asrock Z170 boards could run lower voltage because they tuned it to show lower. Testing in the lab showed that there was no difference or maybe even worse.
> 
> edit: It's possible HWInfo has not been updated to use the correct voltage sense calculation yet, let me investigate.


HWi looks good, so does AID64 (engineer) 5.99.4900. Even HWi v5.93-3590 is reading correctly on the Max XI.


----------



## Jpmboy

Martin778 said:


> But that way I can start posting the best 9900K on the planet that does 5.2 @ 1.2V which isn't true because it needs 1.28-1.3V for that (non AVX) on all other boards.
> 
> *How am I supposed to read out the voltages now without having a DMM hanging out of the case?* Why do I see 0.15Vdroop? Take a look, this is 4.7GHz:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuROyR2xLJE


nah man, the software should be fine. That said, with a board of that quality it is a pretty good idea to check the voltage with a DMM at least once if you are gonna play with a "golden" chip.


----------



## Falkentyne

Luck100 said:


> Hey @Falkentyne, can you elaborate on this bit about the CPU package power reading in HWinfo? Are you really saying it's just VID*current? So it would meaningless if we set a manual voltage? Any sources you can point out for such information?
> 
> I've noticed that when I test different overclocks/voltages, I can get similar power package values at load (say 180W with Prime95 small) in two cases yet I'll have noticeably different load temperatures after 5 minutes. It does make me think the package power is inaccurate, though I'm not sure it agrees with your explanation either.


I got this information from Unclewebb (author of Throttlestop).
No it's not exact, there's undocumented stuff involved too. But it's not far from the truth.
You can test it yourself.
Set a cache ratio of x36 and IA AC and IA DC loadline set to 1 but make sure you are using manual voltage.
Notice your power consumption is going to be much lower now?
If you want it even lower, set IA AC loadline to 1 and IA DC loadline to 210. (do not go higher than these values).

You also know you can change the CPU package power to report it's using 1/5 of the power it's actually using right? 

Go into CPU VR Settings and set IMON SLOPE to 10 and see what happens.


----------



## Robostyle

I've noticed one interesting thing while tinkering with avx offset, "on live" if I can say so, using ixtu... 
Soo, voltage does reacts on avx offset change, even if CPU is under load and non-avx ratio stays the same. I use mixed avx and non-avx workload, such as BFV. Moreover, when I drop avx offset to 7-8, voltage drops down to 1.150V, while CPU reaches 5GHz - and no instability, errors or bsods. 

So, I guess, voltage tables for avx and non-avx workloads, their correlation is much more complicated than I though, even after reading this thread....

It's really weird, I must say - avx offset impact on stability is beyond my understanding. 
So, basically, I have picture like this:
4.8GHz, no AVX offset, 1.248V - completely stable.
5.0GHz, -2 AVX offset, 1.344V - WHEA, BSoD, etc.
5.0GHz, -5 AVX offset, 1.200V - completely stable again! 

I don't get it...


----------



## Falkentyne

Robostyle said:


> I've noticed one interesting thing while tinkering with avx offset, "on live" if I can say so, using ixtu...
> Soo, voltage does reacts on avx offset change, even if CPU is under load and non-avx ratio stays the same. I use mixed avx and non-avx workload, such as BFV. Moreover, when I drop avx offset to 7-8, voltage drops down to 1.150V, while CPU reaches 5GHz - and no instability, errors or bsods.
> 
> So, I guess, voltage tables for avx and non-avx workloads, their correlation is much more complicated than I though, even after reading this thread....
> 
> However, I'm still confused, and, literally have no explanation to this: for an instance, my CPU is completetly stable at 4.8Ghz, no offsets with 1.248V. As well it is completely stable at 5GHz/4.7GHz-AVX with 1.312-1.328V.
> So why is it giving me WHEA and BSoDs with 5GHz/4.8GHz-AVX with 1.344V?
> 
> All voltage figures are from hwinfo, after LLC.


AVX offset can cause problems with the PLL latching to the voltage, because the CPU actually can switch UP in frequency back to 5 ghz, before the voltage can respond higher to the original voltage (the CPU can operate many magnitudes faster than the voltage controller).
This can cause points where the CPU is running at 5 ghz at 1.15v or something for a few microseconds instead of 1.328v (depending on your offset), and then you crash.


----------



## Robostyle

Falkentyne said:


> AVX offset can cause problems with the PLL latching to the voltage, because the CPU actually can switch UP in frequency back to 5 ghz, before the voltage can respond higher to the original voltage (the CPU can operate many magnitudes faster than the voltage controller).
> This can cause points where the CPU is running at 5 ghz at 1.15v or something for a few microseconds instead of 1.328v (depending on your offset), and then you crash.


Yup, noticed that, but literally, next thing confused me even more: while -2 AVX offset, cpu gets enough voltage all the time, 1.328-1.344V, without major spikes or drops - it still gives me errors. But with AVX offset goind more than 3, drops are more significant, however, that doesn't make any kind of instability - totally stable. CPU running 5GHz with voltage at 1.2V - _yeah, no problem, why not?! _ 

I mean, I'll continue my observation, and it might be software glitch or smth - but anyway that's strange


----------



## Falkentyne

Robostyle said:


> Yup, noticed that, but literally, next thing confused me even more: while -2 AVX offset, cpu gets enough voltage all the time, 1.328-1.344V, without major spikes or drops - it still gives me errors. But with AVX offset goind more than 3, drops are more significant, however, that doesn't make any kind of instability - totally stable. CPU running 5GHz with voltage at 1.2V - _yeah, no problem, why not?! _
> 
> I mean, I'll continue my observation, and it might be software glitch or smth - but anyway that's strange


Maybe @elmor knows something about this?
Maybe cache frequency is being affected by AVX offset going lower than 3?


----------



## Jpmboy

Falkentyne said:


> AVX offset can cause problems with the PLL latching to the voltage, because the CPU actually can switch UP in frequency back to 5 ghz, before the voltage can respond higher to the original voltage (the CPU can operate many magnitudes faster than the voltage controller).
> This can cause points where the CPU is running at 5 ghz at 1.15v or something for a few microseconds instead of 1.328v (depending on your offset), and then you crash.


Every dynamic voltage implementation would then be subject to fail... including stock settings. VRm response time is not the problem, P-states allow for more than 2 states and so do various implenentations and generations of AVX. Mystical has a good post on this subject in the Skylake (and/or) x299 thread. 


Robostyle said:


> Yup, noticed that, but literally, next thing confused me even more: while -2 AVX offset, cpu gets enough voltage all the time, 1.328-1.344V, without major spikes or drops - it still gives me errors.* But with AVX offset goind more than 3, drops are more significant, however, that doesn't make any kind of instability - totally stable*. CPU running 5GHz with voltage at 1.2V - _yeah, no problem, why not?! _
> 
> I mean, I'll continue my observation, and it might be software glitch or smth - but anyway that's strange


I'm not sure I understand the issue here... I mean, the simple explanation for the instability at -2 AVX is that 1.344 is not enough voltage for that AVX clock. :blinksmil


----------



## encrypted11

I think @Falkentyne was making a reference to this post

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?106375-MCE-explanations-and-others


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> I'm not sure I understand the issue here... I mean, the simple explanation for the instability at -2 AVX is that 1.344 is not enough voltage for that AVX clock. /forum/images/smilies/blinksmiley.gif


CPU is completely stable at 4.8 AVX (no offset), with 1.248V
As well as 5.0/4.7avx at 1.312. However, decreasing offset hy 1 makes troubles - and that confuses me


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> CPU is completely stable at 4.8 AVX (no offset), with 1.248V
> As well as 5.0/4.7avx at 1.312. However, decreasing offset hy 1 makes troubles - and that confuses me


IDK - if it is stable at 4.8 under AVX at 1.248 (1.25V) and if 5.0 is stable in non-avx at 1.25V, run it at those voltages (fixed voltgae). If stability holds, but fails if you are using adaptive or offset at those voltages, the VID is causing the problem and should be ignored. I run my 8086K and 9700K with manual vcore becasue the VID is higher than the necessary vcore for 5.2 and 5.0 respectively. These are stable not only to p95 (which is pretty useless IMO) but also survive weeks of continuous Boinc CPU load. And I've had boinc fail after passing p95, linpac, and thorough ram stability testing. Eg... stability can only be measured/established in the actual use (never had any fails when these rigs game).
at least when AVX512 AVX and AVX2 are in the fold, there are more than 3 states the CPU can operate in while processing AVX instructions.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jpmboy said:


> Every dynamic voltage implementation would then be subject to fail... including stock settings. VRm response time is not the problem, P-states allow for more than 2 states and so do various implenentations and generations of AVX. Mystical has a good post on this subject in the Skylake (and/or) x299 thread.
> 
> I'm not sure I understand the issue here... I mean, the simple explanation for the instability at -2 AVX is that 1.344 is not enough voltage for that AVX clock. :blinksmil


That's not true.
Elmor was explaining this to me in PM.
He did some tests with "Ultra Extreme" loadline calibration and found extreme instability when testing at the same "Load" voltage that passed with LLC6.
When I first reported my findings, he was asking if I was using an AVX offset, because AVX offsets can cause instability because of something related to PLL latching.



> That is interesting. Would you happen to use AVX negative offset? I've seen that cause instabilities and require additional voltage compared to not using any offset (because of PLL re-locking). But if you use the same settings in both cases it doesn't explain why LLC is making such a difference. It's difficult to tell what's really going on as what we've discussed is based on theory.


----------



## Jpmboy

Falkentyne said:


> That's not true.
> Elmor was explaining this to me in PM.
> He did some tests with "Ultra Extreme" loadline calibration and found extreme instability when testing at the same "Load" voltage that passed with LLC6.
> When I first reported my findings, he was asking if I was using an AVX offset, because AVX offsets can cause instability because of something related to PLL latching.


 uhh- no, what I posted is true - you are confusing LLC effects on phasing with dynamic voltage and clocks. I'm sure that elmor is not confusing the two tho. Besides, why would you ever use ultra extreme LLC, and have it add voltage you are not controlling? Theory I guess.
Anyway - I hope you find a fix and not too many more problems with your setup.
Gladly, the problem you are having are not contagious. They may be or are real... i do not want to catch them.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jpmboy said:


> uhh- no, what I posted is true - you are confusing LLC effects on phasing with dynamic voltage and clocks. I'm sure that elmor is not confusing the two tho. Besides, why would you ever use ultra extreme LLC, and have it add voltage you are not controlling? Theory I guess.
> Anyway - I hope you find a fix and not too many more problems with your setup.
> Gladly, the problem you are having are not contagious. They may be or are real... i do not want to catch them.


No i'm not.
I may have confused you because we're talking about two topics at the same time--Loadline calibration (one person posted about LLC) and AVX offsets (another person posted about AVX offsets). I only mentioned LLC because that's how the topic came up with Elmor. Do you want the original post? I didn't have his permission to post my PM's in chat and I dont think it's polite to post peoples' conversations publicly.

Also Ultra Extreme LLC is not adding voltage. It's causing massive voltage fluctuation, as much as 80mv *under* the bios setting. The average voltage (tested on DMM) is exactly what is set in the bios. 

Anyway tl;dr: People were asking why AVX offsets were causing instability at voltages that should be stable.
Elmor explained this was due to PLL. An Asus engineer on Asus ROG forums explained this precisely. I think it was Raja or Shamino.


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> No i'm not.
> I may have confused you because we're talking about two topics at the same time--Loadline calibration (one person posted about LLC) and AVX offsets (another person posted about AVX offsets). I only mentioned LLC because that's how the topic came up with Elmor. Do you want the original post? I didn't have his permission to post my PM's in chat and I dont think it's polite to post peoples' conversations publicly.
> 
> Also Ultra Extreme LLC is not adding voltage. It's causing massive voltage fluctuation, as much as 80mv *under* the bios setting. The average voltage (tested on DMM) is exactly what is set in the bios.
> 
> Anyway tl;dr: People were asking why AVX offsets were causing instability at voltages that should be stable.
> Elmor explained this was due to PLL. An Asus engineer on Asus ROG forums explained this precisely. I think it was Raja or Shamino.


What does the software core voltage show compared to the DMM?


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> What does the software core voltage show compared to the DMM?


Depends on where you measure the DMM from. :/
You will get different readings if you measure from the MLCC socket caps, than if you measure from VR VOUT directly (VCC sense and VSS sense!).
Check out buildzoid's video.


----------



## encrypted11

Falkentyne said:


> No i'm not.
> I may have confused you because we're talking about two topics at the same time--Loadline calibration (one person posted about LLC) and AVX offsets (another person posted about AVX offsets). I only mentioned LLC because that's how the topic came up with Elmor. Do you want the original post? I didn't have his permission to post my PM's in chat and I dont think it's polite to post peoples' conversations publicly.
> 
> Also Ultra Extreme LLC is not adding voltage. It's causing massive voltage fluctuation, as much as 80mv *under* the bios setting. The average voltage (tested on DMM) is exactly what is set in the bios.
> 
> Anyway tl;dr: People were asking why AVX offsets were causing instability at voltages that should be stable.
> Elmor explained this was due to PLL. An Asus engineer on Asus ROG forums explained this precisely. I think it was Raja or Shamino.


Shamino (Peter Tan) explained on ROG forums


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> Depends on where you measure the DMM from. :/
> You will get different readings if you measure from the MLCC socket caps, than if you measure from VR VOUT directly (VCC sense and VSS sense!).
> Check out buildzoid's video.


Thanks for the Video.


----------



## Falkentyne

encrypted11 said:


> Shamino (Peter Tan) explained on ROG forums


And the fact that there is no +REP button for posts like this is why we can't have nice things 
Thank you by the way!


----------



## encrypted11

On a side note, has anyone attempted stacking Adaptive/VID Offsets on TVB with Speedshift and at least C states up to C6 on a "daily stable" overclock on a 9th gen chip?


----------



## Jpmboy

Falkentyne said:


> No i'm not.
> I may have confused you because we're talking about two topics at the same time--Loadline calibration (one person posted about LLC) and AVX offsets (another person posted about AVX offsets). I only mentioned LLC because that's how the topic came up with Elmor. Do you want the original post? I didn't have his permission to post my PM's in chat and I dont think it's polite to post peoples' conversations publicly.
> 
> Also Ultra Extreme LLC is not adding voltage. It's causing massive voltage fluctuation, as much as 80mv *under* the bios setting. The average voltage (tested on DMM) is exactly what is set in the bios.
> 
> Anyway tl;dr: People were asking why AVX offsets were causing instability at voltages that should be stable.
> Elmor explained this was due to PLL. An Asus engineer on Asus ROG forums explained this precisely. I think it was Raja or Shamino.


okay - i stand corrected. I did not make the guardband connection to the posts.


----------



## Jpmboy

encrypted11 said:


> Shamino (Peter Tan) explained on ROG forums


thanks ! (did you turn your monitor to portrait to make that snip?)


----------



## encrypted11

Jpmboy said:


> thanks ! (did you turn your monitor to portrait to make that snip?)


I'm using the Snagit snipping tool by TechSmith. It's able to perform stitching of screenshot images by auto scrolling vertically till the end of a web page


----------



## Jpmboy

encrypted11 said:


> On a side note, has anyone attempted stacking Adaptive/VID Offsets on TVB with Speedshift and at least C states up to C6 on a "daily stable" overclock on a 9th gen chip?


 I was trying this on my 9700K, but (again) the VID is just too high compared to the necessary voltage for my day-driver clocks that I gave up. The only CFL cpu I have that does not suffer the problem is my 8700K ES.
I'll take a wack at it again with a different 9xxxK chip...


----------



## Jpmboy

I'm trying to trigger this problem discussed earlier... so here's p95 v26.6 and v29.4 1 hour stability with adaptive settings (and bios screenshots). TVB is on auto in both cases (which is disabled at these clocks), LLC 6... identical bios settings. I just ran the avx and non-avx p95 back-to-back. Vcore reported by HWi is the same as I measure off the MB probeit. Note: I do not leave PLL Bandwidth on auto... I lowered it to 1.4V from over 1.7V (note the higher VID than adaptive voltage after vdroop)
I'll try increasing the AVX offset to 3.

edit: no problem with changing AVX from 2 to 3 with either version of p95. IDK - I can't replicate the issue if I'm doing this correctly... or incorrectly as it may be.
what am I missing?


----------



## MegatronicRus

Hello. Apex XI only have dimm.2 module for pci-e nvme ssd. Which side of the module should i use to pci-e for my video card runs on full speed? Or as Gene XI they always run on x8 speed?


----------



## elmor

MegatronicRus said:


> Hello. Apex XI only have dimm.2 module for pci-e nvme ssd. Which side of the module should i use to pci-e for my video card runs on full speed? Or as Gene XI they always run on x8 speed?


The manual is wrong. Both M.2 slots on the DIMM.2 are from the PCH. You don't lose any CPU PCI-e lanes.


----------



## Luck100

Can anybody tell me what's the difference between adaptive voltage and offset voltage?


----------



## Jpmboy

simply said... offset applies the voltage across the entire vid table (eg, it adds the specified offset voltage to the VID at all multipliers from idle to max turbo) and adaptive applies the set voltage only to the Max turbo multiplier and runs the stock VID for all from idle to max turbo - this gets a bit more involved when using speedshift instead of speedstep (and this is why adaptive will not work with high strap/bclk like 125 or 166, since you are not likely to use any turbo multiplier at these BCLKs). Note: adaptive still uses the VID value and calculates the turbo voltage from that, so if the CPU has a VID that is higher than the necessary voltage for stability, it can run high in older implementations.
lol - I guess that was not very "simply said"


----------



## Falkentyne

Jpmboy said:


> simply said... offset applies the voltage across the entire vid table (eg, it adds the specified offset voltage to the VID at all multipliers from idle to max turbo) and adaptive applies the set voltage only to the Max turbo multiplier and runs the stock VID for all from idle to max turbo - this gets a bit more involved when using speedshift instead of speedstep (and this is why adaptive will not work with high strap/bclk like 125 or 166, since you are not likely to use any turbo multiplier at these BCLKs). Note: adaptive still uses the VID value and calculates the turbo voltage from that, so if the CPU has a VID that is higher than the necessary voltage for stability, it can run high in older implementations.
> lol - I guess that was not very "simply said"


Thank you. I didn't know this. Of course my fault for not having an Asus board, eh.


----------



## Luck100

Jpmboy said:


> simply said... offset applies the voltage across the entire vid table (eg, it adds the specified offset voltage to the VID at all multipliers from idle to max turbo) and adaptive applies the set voltage only to the Max turbo multiplier and runs the stock VID for all from idle to max turbo - this gets a bit more involved when using speedshift instead of speedstep (and this is why adaptive will not work with high strap/bclk like 125 or 166, since you are not likely to use any turbo multiplier at these BCLKs). Note: adaptive still uses the VID value and calculates the turbo voltage from that, so if the CPU has a VID that is higher than the necessary voltage for stability, it can run high in older implementations.
> lol - I guess that was not very "simply said"


Thanks. With adaptive on z390, one selects an "additional voltage" (which I assume only applies at Max turbo and above) and and offset. So with 9900k, I'd get VID + offset below 5 GHz, and a constant voltage (set by "additional voltage" entry) at 5 GHz and up?

Right now I'm using offset mode and it seems to work quite well but I was curious about adaptive.


----------



## Jpmboy

Luck100 said:


> Thanks. With adaptive on z390, one selects an "additional voltage" (which I assume only applies at Max turbo and above) and and offset. So with 9900k, I'd get VID + offset below 5 GHz, and a constant voltage (set by "additional voltage" entry) at 5 GHz and up?
> 
> Right now I'm using offset mode and it seems to work quite well but I was curious about adaptive.


 It is called "additional" because it uses the VID for the max turbo frequency eg, 50x for 5GHz. The most straight forward manner to go about this is to determine the voltage necessary for stability at the OC you are working on using manual override (and note the VID for the same at differing loads, if it is significantly higher than the necessary vcore, don;t be supprised if adaptive runs high... and adjust accordingly). Then change to Adaptive and enter that voltage you just determined manually into the Additional Turbo Voltage field. Be sure to have CPU SVID on Auto (or enabled.. but you can leave it on Auto for offset, adaptive or manual override on ASUS boards). Additionally... SVID "Best Case Scenario" can be helpful. 




Falkentyne said:


> Thank you. I didn't know this. Of course my fault for not having an Asus board, eh.


what's the fault? :thumb:


----------



## Martin778

elmor said:


> The manual is wrong. Both M.2 slots on the DIMM.2 are from the PCH. You don't lose any CPU PCI-e lanes.


Oh wow, I always thought the strongest point of DIMM.2 was that it used CPU lanes and was very close to the CPU to keep the path short. 
Do you think it's then more worthwile to use the PCIE slot and an adapter to M.2 NVMe? Since the DIMM.2 completely obstructs all airflow to the RAM modules


----------



## elmor

Martin778 said:


> Oh wow, I always thought the strongest point of DIMM.2 was that it used CPU lanes and was very close to the CPU to keep the path short.
> Do you think it's then more worthwile to use the PCIE slot and an adapter to M.2 NVMe? Since the DIMM.2 completely obstructs all airflow to the RAM modules


It depends on the specific board and what makes the most sense. For example on Rampage VI Extreme there are two sets of DIMM.2, one through the PCH and one through the CPU. Since there are no on-board M.2 slots on M11A, the DIMM.2 was connected to the PCH. Up to 2 drives off the PCH should be fine for most in terms of bandwidth.

If you do not want to use the DIMM.2, you can opt for a PCI-e x4 M.2 adapter card on the PCH-connected PCIEX16_3 slot (electrically x4).

The main benefits of being connected to the CPU is that you get the full bandwidth and possibly lower latency. The down side is that you might have to sacrifice PCI-e lanes for graphics or others and have to rely on software RAID (OS dependent and not bootable). Intel VROC or AMD NVMe RAID still use the CPU for offloading.

Likewise, the benefit of using the PCH lanes are that you can do hardware RAID. It is however limited to the bandwidth available between the CPU and the PCH, which currently is PCI-e Gen3 x4 = 3.85GB/s on most platforms.


----------



## Nizzen

There are no benefits using vroc with nvme ssd'd. You getting higher sequential read and write, but loose 4k random read @qd=1. Better buying a bigger ssd, or Optane 905 for OS, that actually is faster. There are litterally no use for ultrahigh seq read/write, unless moving huge amounts of video/data to another very fast medium. Over network, you need more than 40Gbit and infiniband et...


----------



## bl4ckdot

@Jpmboy could you please share your settings (if you have any) for a 9900k 24/7 for the M11E ? 
Ordered one today with a 9900k w/ OC frame. 

Do you also have any specific advises ? Like do 9900k prefer manual or adaptive voltage etc..

Others are also very welcome to share their experience  

Thank you all


----------



## Jpmboy

bl4ckdot said:


> @*Jpmboy* could you please share your settings (if you have any) for a 9900k 24/7 for the M11E ?
> Ordered one today with a 9900k w/ OC frame.
> Do you also have any specific advises ? Like do 9900k prefer manual or adaptive voltage etc..
> Others are also very welcome to share their experience
> Thank you all


 I don't have a 9900K, but do have a 9700K (8c/8t). Adaptive should work just fine on the M11E. I can post up a txt file of the bios settings I have for 5.0/4.8/4000c16 with the 9700K if you are interested. 
But it's the same as an 8700K or 8086K at the basic level... just 2 more cores.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Jpmboy said:


> I don't have a 9900K, but do have a 9700K (8c/8t). Adaptive should work just fine on the M11E. I can post up a txt file of the bios settings I have for 5.0/4.8/4000c16 with the 9700K if you are interested.
> But it's the same as an 8700K or 8086K at the basic level... just 2 more cores.


That would be very much appreciated !


----------



## Jpmboy

bl4ckdot said:


> That would be very much appreciated !


you got it.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Jpmboy said:


> you got it.


Thanks


----------



## Nevk

Maximus XI Hero + 9900K + Lastest BIOS 0805

If i open the AI Suite 3 or HWINFO64 and check the Sensors, i will get this warning in the event viewer.
This is normal or what should i do? Anyone got the same warning message?

Please give me some feedback. thanks!

: The embedded controller (EC) returned data when none was requested. The BIOS might be trying to access the EC without synchronizing with the operating system. This data will be ignored. No further action is necessary; however, you should check with your computer manufacturer for an upgraded BIOS.


(like this one)
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...er-(EC)-returned-data-when-none-was-requested


----------



## Jpmboy

Nevk said:


> Maximus XI Hero + 9900K + Lastest BIOS 0805
> 
> If i open the AI Suite 3 or HWINFO64 and check the Sensors, i will get this warning in the event viewer.
> This is normal or what should i do? Anyone got the same warning message?
> 
> Please give me some feedback. thanks!
> 
> : The embedded controller (EC) returned data when none was requested. The BIOS might be trying to access the EC without synchronizing with the operating system. This data will be ignored. No further action is necessary; however, you should check with your computer manufacturer for an upgraded BIOS.
> 
> 
> (like this one)
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...er-(EC)-returned-data-when-none-was-requested


do not enable the ASUS EC when HWi asks you this question when you first install it and start it.


----------



## Luck100

Nevk said:


> Maximus XI Hero + 9900K + Lastest BIOS 0805
> 
> If i open the AI Suite 3 or HWINFO64 and check the Sensors, i will get this warning in the event viewer.
> This is normal or what should i do? Anyone got the same warning message?
> 
> Please give me some feedback. thanks!
> 
> : The embedded controller (EC) returned data when none was requested. The BIOS might be trying to access the EC without synchronizing with the operating system. This data will be ignored. No further action is necessary; however, you should check with your computer manufacturer for an upgraded BIOS.
> 
> 
> (like this one)
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...er-(EC)-returned-data-when-none-was-requested


Yes, I get the same warning. It seems harmless as far as I can see.


----------



## Nevk

Jpmboy said:


> do not enable the ASUS EC when HWi asks you this question when you first install it and start it.


Thanks.
If i do not enable ASUS EC, i cant monitor CPU_OPT, VRM, PCH...
According to my test, AIDA64->Sensors will also cause the warning message, want to know if someone also has this problem or this problem is in common.



Luck100 said:


> Yes, I get the same warning. It seems harmless as far as I can see.


Thanks, hope this problem is in common.


----------



## Jpmboy

Nevk said:


> Thanks.
> *If i do not enable ASUS EC, i cant monitor CPU_OPT, VRM, PCH*...
> According to my test, AIDA64->Sensors will also cause the warning message, want to know if someone also has this problem or this problem is in common.
> 
> Thanks, hope this problem is in common.


well of course that's the case. The warning is just a warning, not an error and the HWi author (has a thread here at OCN) reminds you of this. It is a polling thing (i believe) with the ASUS EC.


----------



## Robostyle

Hey, @Jpmboy, I remember you have M11EX - was there any major OC omprovements over previous CFL board(s)?


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Hey, @*Jpmboy* , I remember you have M11EX - was there any major OC omprovements over previous CFL board(s)?


over the Apex 11? not that I found... which is a good thing since the Apex 11 is an incredible OC board. I have them both here right now. the Apex is running an 8086K at 5.0 with 4400 on 16GB of ram, the Extreme 11 is running a 9700K at 5.0 with 4000 on 32GB of ram... but I will say that the Max11E is a much more "featured" board. Runs great in my experience.


----------



## Robostyle

Yeah, well, maybe versus older z370 boards, M10F/M10C/M10H, I mean. 
M11EX appeared nearby for 559$...though I still think >300$ for the motherboard is nonsence, still wanted to try out this one personally


----------



## Robostyle

Anybody knows any kind of “folks” guide for qcodes? Asus manual is rather useless when using qcodes for overclocking, whatever code pops up, it labeled as “reserved by next uefi/firmware/oem/ministry order/ur mom” - kind of useless info


----------



## smrdel

Hello all

I currently have a system that comprises of the Asus Rampage IV Black Edition, i7 4930k, 4 x 8GB - 32GB 2400 Speed DDR3 ram, 2x ASUS GTX 980 in SLI. Over the life of the board (6 years) i have doubled the RAM and upgraded the CPU once 

To the best of testing ability i think the mobo has a issue with it which is causing random lockups - The symptoms are i lose image on my screens i.e goes black, still hear sound for about 20 secs then PC locks up for good - need to do a hard reset. Happens when i game, watch twitch streamers or leave torrents to seed overnight or even when its not doing anything. 

I have tried just about everything and its looking like its a issue with the board (only way to test is to swap boards but don't have a spare X79!)

So looking at a new mobo, CPU, RAM, GPU combo and reusing the case, power supply, SSD and m.2 drives. and Corsair CPU cooler for the short term.

My initial thoughts were looking at the top of the Range ASUS motherboards for sockets 1151, 2066 and TR4 as a big fan of ASUS stuff.

I mainly PC game and do some video editing as well as all the standard stuff such as surfing net, watch twitch,dl torrents, office.

My initial PC upgrade was looking at ASUS ROG Maximus XI Extreme Motherboard, Corsair 32GB (2x16G) CMK32GX4M2B3000C15 DDR4 3000Mhz Vengeance LPX Memory, i7 8700k CPU and the ASUS ROG Strix GeForce RTX 2070 Gaming OC 8GB. I would upgrade later to 10G ethernet later as i have another PC that i use as a backup rig so extra transfer speed would be good as i deal with large video files - I have used SLI before but for the next rig would maybe just stick with the one GPU.

Would be interested in any feedback for the parts picked, why would you consider the other sockets i.e 2066, TR4 and whats the future of the 1151 socket ? - is it nearing the end of its life ? should i wait for something coming ?

Thanks in advance


----------



## Martin778

1151 will most probably be dead when 10th gen comes out. LGA2066 no one knows, it only has old Skylake chips available for it so far. 
For gaming the 9900K with 4000 C17-C18 RAM would be the best.


----------



## Jpmboy

smrdel said:


> Hello all
> 
> I currently have a system that comprises of the Asus Rampage IV Black Edition, i7 4930k, 4 x 8GB - 32GB 2400 Speed DDR3 ram, 2x ASUS GTX 980 in SLI. Over the life of the board (6 years) i have doubled the RAM and upgraded the CPU once
> 
> To the best of testing ability i think the mobo has a issue with it which is causing random lockups - The symptoms are i lose image on my screens i.e goes black, still hear sound for about 20 secs then PC locks up for good - need to do a hard reset. Happens when i game, watch twitch streamers or leave torrents to seed overnight or even when its not doing anything.
> 
> I have tried just about everything and its looking like its a issue with the board (only way to test is to swap boards but don't have a spare X79!)
> 
> So looking at a new mobo, CPU, RAM, GPU combo and reusing the case, power supply, SSD and m.2 drives. and Corsair CPU cooler for the short term.
> 
> My initial thoughts were looking at the top of the Range ASUS motherboards for sockets 1151, 2066 and TR4 as a big fan of ASUS stuff.
> 
> I mainly PC game and do some video editing as well as all the standard stuff such as surfing net, watch twitch,dl torrents, office.
> 
> My initial PC upgrade was looking at ASUS ROG Maximus XI Extreme Motherboard, Corsair 32GB (2x16G) CMK32GX4M2B3000C15 DDR4 3000Mhz Vengeance LPX Memory, i7 8700k CPU and the ASUS ROG Strix GeForce RTX 2070 Gaming OC 8GB. I would upgrade later to 10G ethernet later as i have another PC that i use as a backup rig so extra transfer speed would be good as i deal with large video files - I have used SLI before but for the next rig would maybe just stick with the one GPU.
> 
> Would be interested in any feedback for the parts picked, why would you consider the other sockets i.e 2066, TR4 and whats the future of the 1151 socket ? - is it nearing the end of its life ? should i wait for something coming ?
> 
> Thanks in advance


Not sure how you've assigned the x79 issue to the MB? Seems like it could be the 980s. That said, if you are looking for any reason at all to upgrade  go with z390 and a 9900K. If you use you rig mainly for games with a single card, a 5.0 8700K or 9900K is the way to go. 6 cores is plenty for any game... then get the best GPU you can afford.


----------



## smrdel

Jpmboy said:


> Not sure how you've assigned the x79 issue to the MB? Seems like it could be the 980s. That said, if you are looking for any reason at all to upgrade  go with z390 and a 9900K. If you use you rig mainly for games with a single card, a 5.0 8700K or 9900K is the way to go. 6 cores is plenty for any game... then get the best GPU you can afford.


the black edition is a X79 board - as i had 2x980's I pulled one out and tested it on its own. I swapped with the other one same problem - thought it could be GPU power cable swapped cables - same problem - swapped power supply same problem, swapped GPU slots same problem for both 980's - unless they are both stuffed ? I have tried a fresh install of windows - same problem, tested RAM - same issue, turned onboard sound off - same problem. I tested the CPU - no problems with the test. One other thing to try is reinstalling windows on ssd rather then m.2 drive which is installed on PCIE adaptor

The 9900k is stretching my budget hence selecting the 8800k which i have read is also pretty good


----------



## smrdel

Martin778 said:


> 1151 will most probably be dead when 10th gen comes out. LGA2066 no one knows, it only has old Skylake chips available for it so far.
> For gaming the 9900K with 4000 C17-C18 RAM would be the best.



any idea when 10th gen is coming out ?

I choose the 8700k and 3000 speed RAM as it fits my budget - The 3000 RAM i can swap into another HTPC when i choose to go with quicker RAM and i could always upgrade to the 9900k at a later date when I need to hold onto the PC for a bit longer.like i did with my current setup.


----------



## Jpmboy

smrdel said:


> the black edition is a X79 board - as i had 2x980's I pulled one out and tested it on its own. I swapped with the other one same problem - thought it could be GPU power cable swapped cables - same problem - swapped power supply same problem, swapped GPU slots same problem for both 980's - unless they are both stuffed ? I have tried a fresh install of windows - same problem, tested RAM - same issue, turned onboard sound off - same problem. I tested the CPU - no problems with the test. One other thing to try is reinstalling windows on ssd rather then m.2 drive which is installed on PCIE adaptor
> 
> The 9900k is stretching my budget hence selecting the 8800k which i have read is also pretty good


 yeah, the 8700K is a fine gaming CPU. THe difference will be immediately noticeable (even the IPC is much better than Ivy bridge). If hyperthreading is not a necessity, the 9700K can be found pretty cheap (if at all) since it is considered an oddball 8c/8t cpu nowadays. I have one running 5.2GHz with 2 2080Tis and 32GB 4000c16 ram on the Max11E board... very fast for gaming (according to the "younglings"). 

Back to your current system... I'm running a R4BE here also (4960X). THe loss of video signal can be board-related but it is usually something in the video subsystem. I recently had an issue with one rig where it would hang and CTD or restart - it turned out to be the SLI bridge when bad and simply disabling SLI did not resolve it... I had to remove the bridge, then everything worked fine (no SLI tho, I replaced the fancy NV bridge with the bridge that came with the board, all good again). If the rig is assembled, try removing the SLI bridge (disable SLI in NVCP first).


----------



## smrdel

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, the 8700K is a fine gaming CPU. THe difference will be immediately noticeable (even the IPC is much better than Ivy bridge). If hyperthreading is not a necessity, the 9700K can be found pretty cheap (if at all) since it is considered an oddball 8c/8t cpu nowadays. I have one running 5.2GHz with 2 2080Tis and 32GB 4000c16 ram on the Max11E board... very fast for gaming (according to the "younglings").
> 
> Back to your current system... I'm running a R4BE here also (4960X). THe loss of video signal can be board-related but it is usually something in the video subsystem. I recently had an issue with one rig where it would hang and CTD or restart - it turned out to be the SLI bridge when bad and simply disabling SLI did not resolve it... I had to remove the bridge, then everything worked fine (no SLI tho, I replaced the fancy NV bridge with the bridge that came with the board, all good again). If the rig is assembled, try removing the SLI bridge (disable SLI in NVCP first).


I had the 2 GTX 980's in there but have only been running 1 atm and the problem still persists no matter which one i use is sitting in there - also moved from 1st slot to 2nd slot for for each 980 and still problem persists. I doubt but possible that both are screwed ! I do have a spare GTX 970 I could throw in there and test that combo I guess. I also wish I had another board to test my theory !

In terms of memory i have 4 sticks of 8GB and only have one 8GB in there now and still get the lockups - trying to cycle the RAM chips through the first slot - wanted to try swaping the 4 chips from suggested ram slots (grey I think ?) to the black ones or vice versa but the system wouldnt boot.

Really like the MAX 11E board - wish it had a 10G ethernet port but no biggie can add that later. Needed to prune cost for the bits so 3000 speed RAM and 2070 GPU instead of 2080 - about a $85 dollar price difference between the 8700k and 9700k here for me - just read its not really that much better.

Any plans to release more CPU's for socket 1151 ? with my last build i basically bought what i could afford at the time then about 2 years ago bought the 4930k cheap (actually sold my 3930k for the same price that i bought the 4930k !)

I would probably do the same with this build buy something decent then upgrade at a later date


----------



## Jpmboy

like I said, even with one card switched off, the SLI bridge caused problems... until I tried running without it. A bad ram stick is not likely to cause the symptoms you report. A bad gfx subsystem (card, bridge, slot, or cpu+MB) is more likely.
As far as new 1151 chips... an 8 core/16t 9900K is quite a load for that socket and power plane... and really fast. An 8700K or 9700K is not gonna limit anything graphics a 2070 can handle (or a 2080Ti for that matter). If a future upgrade is the issue, get a 2066 and find a used 7740X (4c/8t) there are some around, they all do 5.0 (I have 2 here), then upgrade to a new or used X-class HCC CPU. 40 pcie lanes, up to 18c/36t etc. I'd check the OCN market place for the used gear. On the other hand, you can build a really quick AMD rig arounf the 2700X cpu. 

Ya know, you can wait for the next new thing... and then wait again, cause there's always something new.


----------



## smrdel

Jpmboy said:


> like I said, even with one card switched off, the SLI bridge caused problems... until I tried running without it. A bad ram stick is not likely to cause the symptoms you report. A bad gfx subsystem (card, bridge, slot, or cpu+MB) is more likely.
> As far as new 1151 chips... an 8 core/16t 9900K is quite a load for that socket and power plane... and really fast. An 8700K or 9700K is not gonna limit anything graphics a 2070 can handle (or a 2080Ti for that matter). If a future upgrade is the issue, get a 2066 and find a used 7740X (4c/8t) there are some around, they all do 5.0 (I have 2 here), then upgrade to a new or used X-class HCC CPU. 40 pcie lanes, up to 18c/36t etc. I'd check the OCN market place for the used gear. On the other hand, you can build a really quick AMD rig arounf the 2700X cpu.
> 
> Ya know, you can wait for the next new thing... and then wait again, cause there's always something new.


true true - you can always be waiting.

Not really worried about future upgrade just asking for general info - in my previous experience with PC upgrades CPU upgrade happen rarely for me - its more a whole new PC.

With regards to the 2 x GTX 980's i have - I have only one installed in my rig not 2. The problem occurs when both were in the system and then tested them both seperately on there own - problem still happens with either card and both in the system. When I had both in the system - I had them in slots 1 and 3 - tried them both on their own in slot 1 as well as in slot 2 on their own - same problem same symptoms.

i have a m.2 drive on a Silverstone PCIE adaptor card in the 4th GPU slot - figure this maybe causing the issue ? 

much appreciate your thoughts as well

Cheers


----------



## Jpmboy

Sorry, hard to tell what you got going on there. both cards work solo, but not solo when 2 are present on the board?
ahh f-it. get the upgrade.


----------



## smrdel

Jpmboy said:


> Sorry, hard to tell what you got going on there. both cards work solo, but not solo when 2 are present on the board?
> ahh f-it. get the upgrade.


lolz

was trying to simplify what i was trying. I have the problem not matter what combination of card/ cards i try and no matter what slots they seem to be in.

- both cards in PC in slots 1 and 3 - Fail
- one card in PC in slot 1 - Fail
- (swap to the other 980) one card in PC in slot 1 - Fail
- one card in PC in slot 2- Fail
- (swap to the other 980) one card in PC in slot 2 - Fail

hope this helps

I dont think its the cards or as i put one in another PC and has been running fine

2 options for proposed upgrade

socket 1151 based - i7 8700k ( even thinking i5 9600k ), ASUS ROG Maximus XI Extreme Motherboard, Corsair Vengeance LPX CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 and ASUS ROG Strix GeForce RTX 2080 Gaming 8GB

TR4 based - AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X, ASUS ROG Zenith Extreme Alpha Motherboard, Corsair Vengeance LPX CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 and ASUS ROG Strix GeForce RTX 2080 Gaming 8GB

which option to take !


----------



## Grisk

Hello all

I'm going to buy 9600K and GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS PRO.
Will Samsung M378A2K43CB1-CRC 16Gb (two sticks) be compatible with this MB (it's not in QVL)? Can it be overclocked till 3000-3200 here (the processor will be used in turbobust only)?


----------



## Jpmboy

smrdel said:


> lolz
> 
> was trying to simplify what i was trying. I have the problem not matter what combination of card/ cards i try and no matter what slots they seem to be in.
> 
> - both cards in PC in slots 1 and 3 - Fail
> - one card in PC in slot 1 - Fail
> - (swap to the other 980) one card in PC in slot 1 - Fail
> - one card in PC in slot 2- Fail
> - (swap to the other 980) one card in PC in slot 2 - Fail
> 
> hope this helps
> 
> I dont think its the cards or as i put one in another PC and has been running fine
> 
> 2 options for proposed upgrade
> 
> socket 1151 based - i7 8700k ( even thinking i5 9600k ), ASUS ROG Maximus XI Extreme Motherboard, Corsair Vengeance LPX CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 and ASUS ROG Strix GeForce RTX 2080 Gaming 8GB
> 
> TR4 based - AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X, ASUS ROG Zenith Extreme Alpha Motherboard, Corsair Vengeance LPX CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 and ASUS ROG Strix GeForce RTX 2080 Gaming 8GB
> 
> which option to take !


honestly.., for a gaming rig if you go AMD, skip TR4 and use AM4 with a 2700X and save money.


----------



## smrdel

Jpmboy said:


> honestly.., for a gaming rig if you go AMD, skip TR4 and use AM4 with a 2700X and save money.


Thanks for the tips - would save me a little money if went AM4 (I would mainly save money on the board and cpu) but not big fan of any of the boards ! Dont think i can go wrong with whatever i go with in the end !


----------



## bl4ckdot

smrdel said:


> Thanks for the tips - would save me a little money if went AM4 (I would mainly save money on the board and cpu) but not big fan of any of the boards ! Dont think i can go wrong with whatever i go with in the end !


For AM4, the Asus Crosshair VII is really good.


----------



## Ripple

Hey, I am looking for some advice on a new Z390 MB. I currently have the ROG Strix Z390-E Gaming MB but it's not very good for overclocking. I think I need a MB with 8-pin EPS +4-pin. In addition, I currently have a 9600K and have run all the Unigine benchmarks at 5GHz. Unfortunately I cannot get through the CPU part of 3DMark TimeSpy Extreme. So I would like to try a different MB. I am open to suggestions. Thanks in advance.


----------



## wingman99

Ripple said:


> Hey, I am looking for some advice on a new Z390 MB. I currently have the ROG Strix Z390-E Gaming MB but it's not very good for overclocking. I think I need a MB with 8-pin EPS +4-pin. In addition, I currently have a 9600K and have run all the Unigine benchmarks at 5GHz. Unfortunately I cannot get through the CPU part of 3DMark TimeSpy Extreme. So I would like to try a different MB. I am open to suggestions. Thanks in advance.


Did you try increasing the core voltage. I see folks running 5.0GHz with i9 9900k on ROG Strix Z390-E.


----------



## Ripple

Hey, thanks. I did increase the core voltage. I can run every benchmark at 4.9GHz with 1.359V all day long, it's very stable. As soon as I bump it up to 5GHz, she needs over 1.4V to be stable. I think I might "upgrade" to the 9700K along with a new MB purchase. Thanks!


----------



## wingman99

Ripple said:


> Hey, thanks. I did increase the core voltage. I can run every benchmark at 4.9GHz with 1.359V all day long, it's very stable. As soon as I bump it up to 5GHz, she needs over 1.4V to be stable. I think I might "upgrade" to the 9700K along with a new MB purchase. Thanks!


You just lost the silicon lottery. I can run 5.0 with i5 8600k at 1.296 prime95 FMA3 on a 4 phase $120.00 Gigabyte Z370 HD3.


----------



## JMCB

So I have a Asus STRIX Z370-E motherboard and I'm thinking about switching to the i9-9900k. Would I see a significant performance hit on watercooling? With it hitting 5.0ghz I probably won't overclock it much, except to bench it once and awhile. Or would I be better off just switching the MB to z390 as well?


----------



## wingman99

JMCB said:


> So I have a Asus STRIX Z370-E motherboard and I'm thinking about switching to the i9-9900k. Would I see a significant performance hit on watercooling? With it hitting 5.0ghz I probably won't overclock it much, except to bench it once and awhile. Or would I be better off just switching the MB to z390 as well?


It is easy to change the processor. So give the Asus STRIX Z370-E a try with the i9-9900k first and see if you like it. If you don't pick up a GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS ELITE.


----------



## Jpmboy

JMCB said:


> So I have a Asus STRIX Z370-E motherboard and I'm thinking about switching to the i9-9900k. *Would I see a significant performance hit on watercooling?* With it hitting 5.0ghz I probably won't overclock it much, except to bench it once and awhile. Or would I be better off just switching the MB to z390 as well?


what do you mean?


----------



## smrdel

I was thinking of purchasing the ASUS Maximus XI Code board for a new PC build.( In my research it seems the Gigabyte AORUS ultra board is a better choice ? )

I wanted to confirm that it is possible to install the ASUS AREION 10G card or the Asus XG-C100C 10GB Base-T PCIe Network Adapter which need a PCI E x 4 slot in the top most PCI E slot i.e the one above the first GPU slot ? 

I plan on using both m.2 slots on this board - I think this means i lose the use of one of the SATA ports ? No 2 I think ?

Cheers


----------



## Jpmboy

smrdel said:


> I was thinking of purchasing the ASUS Maximus XI Code board for a new PC build.( In my research it seems the Gigabyte AORUS ultra board is a better choice ? )
> 
> I wanted to confirm that it is possible to install the ASUS AREION 10G card or the Asus XG-C100C 10GB Base-T PCIe Network Adapter which need a PCI E x 4 slot in the top most PCI E slot i.e the one above the first GPU slot ?
> 
> I plan on using both m.2 slots on this board - I think this means i lose the use of one of the SATA ports ? No 2 I think ?
> 
> Cheers


did you check the on-line manual?


----------



## smrdel

Jpmboy said:


> did you check the on-line manual?


I did just wanted to confirm - not exactly easy to understand reading the manual 

with regards to top PCIe slot it mentions its PCIe x 1 in manual - does this mean its a x1 or PCIe slot no 1 ?

In the Expansion slots section of the specs on ASUS website it mentions

Socket 1151 for 9th / 8th Gen Intel® Core™, Pentium® Gold and Celeron® processors
2 x PCIe 3.0 x16 (x16, x8/x8, or x8/x4+x4)
Intel® Z390 Chipset
1 x PCIe 3.0 x16 (max at x4 mode) *
1 x PCIe 3.0 x16 

but in the Manual

it says this 



hence my confusion

I would like to get a 10G ethernet card which requires a PCI e x4 spec slot and was looking at installing it in the top slots above the first GPU PCIe slot ?

With regards to the m.2 question i have - I would like to install a Samsung 970pro and a 960 Pro m.2 drive on this board - one to boot from and another as a games drive - both 2280 sized 

the manual mentions this 



so installing both on this board I will lose SATA port 2 by my understanding ?


----------



## bl4ckdot

Hello everyone,
So I installed my M11E with a 9900K this weekend to replace my M10F and 8700K and I'm really happy how it turned out.

The 9900K is stable at 5Ghz (0 AVX offset, LLC 6, 1.27v) for 3 hours in realbench which basically cover my needs in term of stability. Peak temp was 83°C which is very good. 
The M11E also has way less difficulty to use my 4 DIMMs, I'm currently testing stability but it's very promising so far.

I still have not test past 5Ghz since I'm currently trying to find my 24/7 settings.

Is overcloking the cache (like 4600 or 4700) really worth it on 9900K ?


----------



## Silent Scone

bl4ckdot said:


> Hello everyone,
> So I installed my M11E with a 9900K this weekend to replace my M10F and 8700K and I'm really happy how it turned out.
> 
> The 9900K is stable at 5Ghz (0 AVX offset, LLC 6, 1.27v) for 3 hours in realbench which basically cover my needs in term of stability. Peak temp was 83°C which is very good.
> The M11E also has way less difficulty to use my 4 DIMMs, I'm currently testing stability but it's very promising so far.
> 
> I still have not test past 5Ghz since I'm currently trying to find my 24/7 settings.
> 
> Is overcloking the cache (like 4600 or 4700) really worth it on 9900K ?


Gains on uncore are still slim. When pushing memory frequency it can help to leave at defaults.


----------



## Jpmboy

bl4ckdot said:


> Hello everyone,
> So I installed my M11E with a 9900K this weekend to replace my M10F and 8700K and I'm really happy how it turned out.
> 
> The 9900K is stable at 5Ghz (0 AVX offset, LLC 6, 1.27v) for 3 hours in realbench which basically cover my needs in term of stability. Peak temp was 83°C which is very good.
> The M11E also has way less difficulty to use my 4 DIMMs, I'm currently testing stability but it's very promising so far.
> 
> I still have not test past 5Ghz since I'm currently trying to find my 24/7 settings.
> 
> Is overcloking the cache (like 4600 or 4700) really worth it on 9900K ?


yeah, not much gain, but since it is fed by vcore, just get a stable OC with cache on auto then see how much cache OC is "free" at that same voltage.


----------



## wingman99

smrdel said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I did just wanted to confirm - not exactly easy to understand reading the manual
> 
> with regards to top PCIe slot it mentions its PCIe x 1 in manual - does this mean its a x1 or PCIe slot no 1 ?
> 
> In the Expansion slots section of the specs on ASUS website it mentions
> 
> Socket 1151 for 9th / 8th Gen Intel® Core™, Pentium® Gold and Celeron® processors
> 2 x PCIe 3.0 x16 (x16, x8/x8, or x8/x4+x4)
> Intel® Z390 Chipset
> 1 x PCIe 3.0 x16 (max at x4 mode) *
> 1 x PCIe 3.0 x16
> 
> but in the Manual
> 
> it says this
> 
> 
> 
> hence my confusion
> 
> I would like to get a 10G ethernet card which requires a PCI e x4 spec slot and was looking at installing it in the top slots above the first GPU PCIe slot ?
> 
> With regards to the m.2 question i have - I would like to install a Samsung 970pro and a 960 Pro m.2 drive on this board - one to boot from and another as a games drive - both 2280 sized
> 
> the manual mentions this
> 
> 
> 
> so installing both on this board I will lose SATA port 2 by my understanding ?



The PCI-E x4 slot you need will have to use a PCI-E X8 slot. Not the PCI-E x1 slot above the PCI-E x16 GPU slot. Also if you use 2 M.2s you will lose the use of SATA port 2.


----------



## smrdel

wingman99 said:


> [/SPOILER]
> 
> The PCI-E x4 slot you need will have to use a PCI-E X8 slot. Not the PCI-E x1 slot above the PCI-E x16 GPU slot. Also if you use 2 M.2s you will lose the use of SATA port 2.


Thanks thats what i thought so my 10 netwrok card will have to be in one of the lower GPU PCI e slots most likely PCIe x16 no 3 i.e the bottom one ?

What cards require PCIe x 1 these days would have thought they would be all at least x4 ? the only thing i can think of is basic gigabit network cards


----------



## wingman99

smrdel said:


> Thanks thats what i thought so my 10 netwrok card will have to be in one of the lower GPU PCI e slots most likely PCIe x16 no 3 i.e the bottom one ?
> 
> What cards require PCIe x 1 these days would have thought they would be all at least x4 ? the only thing i can think of is basic gigabit network cards


The bottom 3 x16 slot will work at 2x if it shares SATA 6G-56port otherwise it will be x4. x1 slots is used for sound cards, basic gigabit network cards, wireless cards.


----------



## smrdel

wingman99 said:


> The bottom 3 x16 slot will work at 2x if it shares SATA 6G-56port otherwise it will be x4. x1 slots is used for sound cards, basic gigabit network cards, wireless cards.


So I was planning to use all the SATA ports apart from SATA port 2 (because I am using both m.2 slots ) Then I will need to install 10G network card in PCIe 3 x16 slot 2 to get the x4 speed and not the last one ?

So my setup will be like this.....

My 2 x M.2 drives into the 2 x M.2 slots on the board (this will disbale SATA port 2)
2 s SSD's installed on SATA port 1 and port 3
3 mechanical drives on SATA port 4,5,6

RTX 2080 in 3x16 Slot 1

Asus 10G network card in 3 x 16 Slot 2 ( this will reduced the Slot 1 from x 16 to x8 and Slot 2 will be x8 so able to support the x4 10g Network card?)

Gee wiz I thought buying a board was much easier then this all this sharing of lanes is ridiculous and confusing.


----------



## wingman99

smrdel said:


> So I was planning to use all the SATA ports apart from SATA port 2 (because I am using both m.2 slots ) Then I will need to install 10G network card in PCIe 3 x16 slot 2 to get the x4 speed and not the last one ?


Correct setup.


smrdel said:


> So my setup will be like this.....
> 
> My 2 x M.2 drives into the 2 x M.2 slots on the board (this will disbale SATA port 2)
> 2 s SSD's installed on SATA port 1 and port 3
> 3 mechanical drives on SATA port 4,5,6
> 
> RTX 2080 in 3x16 Slot 1
> 
> Asus 10G network card in 3 x 16 Slot 2 ( this will reduced the Slot 1 from x 16 to x8 and Slot 2 will be x8 so able to support the x4 10g Network card?)


Correct setup.


----------



## smrdel

wingman99 said:


> Correct setup.
> 
> Correct setup.


Thanks for help mate

I sent a support email to ASUS and the person reckons the top PCIe slot supports x4 cards !


----------



## Luck100

Anybody running the latest 0805 Bios for Asus Maximus Hero or similar z390? I just updated last night and it seem to be running hotter (same vcore and clocks). I didn't have time to check carefully so it could just be upgrader's paranoia. Ha.


----------



## Jpmboy

I'm running 0805 on the Max11E. Didn't notice anything odd...


----------



## Luck100

Jpmboy said:


> I'm running 0805 on the Max11E. Didn't notice anything odd...


Did you update from an earlier version? Nothing obviously wrong for me, just seems a little worse than 0602.


----------



## Jpmboy

Luck100 said:


> Did you update from an earlier version? Nothing obviously wrong for me, just seems a little worse than 0602.


yes, from the launch bios. worse in what way? These things are not completely recoded on each version, and only "necessary" changes are made to accommodate new hardware etc. Additions/changes are noted in the "Hightlights" on the download page. If that bios is, as you say, worse... flashback. :thumb:


----------



## Luck100

Ok, after some more testing I take it back. Nothing worse with 0805.


----------



## swddeluxx

I love my *Gene XI* Board and my new one 9900K so much :wubsmiley

5.0 GHz / 4.7 GHz Cache / 4400 CL 17 *1T* tested and full stable


----------



## Nizzen

swddeluxx said:


> I love my *Gene XI* Board and my new one 9900K so much :wubsmiley
> 
> 5.0 GHz / 4.7 GHz Cache / 4400 CL 17 *1T* tested and full stable


Nice results 

Can you please share Aida 64 memorybenchmark (memorytests) and timings from ASRock Timing Configurator?

Love from Norway


----------



## swddeluxx

Asus Maximus GeneXI | 50x100.0 | 9900K | 4400 MHz | 17-18-18-38 1T | Ram Voltage 1.48v | 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX CMK16GX4M2F4400C19 (B-Die) 

*Super Pi 32M* *6:34:828s* Results 

i love this Board, really nice job Asus! :heart:










and there *Aida64*


----------



## Jpmboy

swddeluxx said:


> Asus Maximus GeneXI | 50x100.0 | 9900K | 4400 MHz | 17-18-18-38 1T | Ram Voltage 1.48v | 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX CMK16GX4M2F4400C19 (B-Die)
> 
> *Super Pi 32M* *6:34:828s* Results
> 
> i love this Board, really nice job Asus! :heart:
> and there *Super Pi 32M* Result


Nice. The Gene is the RAM OC board for z390! Incredibly low vcore for 5.0... :thumb:
Cinebench R20 or something more demanding of the CPU?


----------



## swddeluxx

Thanks *Jmpboy* :cheers:

there Cinebench R15 and R20 Result but i think my System in not optimised for it


----------



## Jpmboy

if you want to compare/post: https://www.overclock.net/forum/21-...n/1721958-post-your-cinebench-r20-scores.html


----------



## ssateneth

Any recommended settings for dual rank B-DIE on APEX XI? The kit I have is certified for 4000 C19 2 x 16GB. I can do 4100 memtest stable, but frequently stuck on POST code 23. Would like to have more reliable POST at high speeds, or even push higher than 4100 reliably for 24/7.

Had to import the board from EU to USA... think I got a used board though. Retailer was computeruniverse.net. There was an open bag in the box that matched the shape of I/O shield, there was protective plastic film in the shape of I/O shield stuck to a different plastic film, the bag for DIMM.2 module showed evidence of tampering (tape residue on the bag), was missing a bag of DIMM.2 screws, and the DIMM.2 modile already had installed M.2 screws on it and thermal pad protective paper was removed from one side of DIMM.2 module... I don't even know how much used it is :/ can't return it because it's international too.


----------



## Jpmboy

ssateneth said:


> Any recommended settings for dual rank B-DIE on APEX XI? The kit I have is certified for 4000 C19 2 x 16GB. I can do 4100 memtest stable, but frequently stuck on *POST code 23*. Would like to have more reliable POST at high speeds, or even push higher than 4100 reliably for 24/7.
> 
> Had to import the board from EU to USA... think I got a used board though. Retailer was computeruniverse.net. There was an open bag in the box that matched the shape of I/O shield, there was protective plastic film in the shape of I/O shield stuck to a different plastic film, the bag for DIMM.2 module showed evidence of tampering (tape residue on the bag), was missing a bag of DIMM.2 screws, and the DIMM.2 modile already had installed M.2 screws on it and thermal pad protective paper was removed from one side of DIMM.2 module... I don't even know how much used it is :/ can't return it because it's international too.


try adding vccio with q-code 23. also, that board has Memok II (switch) try disabling the switch (no XMP) and re-do the ram OC. :thumb:


----------



## KedarWolf

ssateneth said:


> Any recommended settings for dual rank B-DIE on APEX XI? The kit I have is certified for 4000 C19 2 x 16GB. I can do 4100 memtest stable, but frequently stuck on POST code 23. Would like to have more reliable POST at high speeds, or even push higher than 4100 reliably for 24/7.
> 
> Had to import the board from EU to USA... think I got a used board though. Retailer was computeruniverse.net. There was an open bag in the box that matched the shape of I/O shield, there was protective plastic film in the shape of I/O shield stuck to a different plastic film, the bag for DIMM.2 module showed evidence of tampering (tape residue on the bag), was missing a bag of DIMM.2 screws, and the DIMM.2 modile already had installed M.2 screws on it and thermal pad protective paper was removed from one side of DIMM.2 module... I don't even know how much used it is :/ can't return it because it's international too.


 @Jpmboy who's pretty much a God on these forums swears by the CL15 2x8GB 3600 Trident Z NOT RGB. They are highly binned and I think he got a really high overclock on them if I recall right, 4500 24/7 stable on his 8700k, don't recall on his 9900k. And if I remember right, the CL19 4400 kit is good too, but PM him, he'll tell you.


----------



## swddeluxx

Jpmboy said:


> try adding vccio with q-code 23. also, that board has Memok II (switch) try disabling the switch (no XMP) and re-do the ram OC. :thumb:


You are right - Post *Q-Code 23* is IMC Voltage Amount Correction needed *BUT* - some of Cpu need very small Amount of VCCIO and by Post *Q-Code 23* it is better attempt *adding* OR *remove* a little VCCIO Voltage.
It is important that the Voltage combination VCCIO and VCCSA fit together


----------



## Jpmboy

swddeluxx said:


> You are right - Post *Q-Code 23* is IMC Voltage Amount Correction needed *BUT* - some of Cpu need very small Amount of VCCIO and by Post *Q-Code 23* it is better attempt *adding* OR *remove* a little VCCIO Voltage.
> It is important that the Voltage combination VCCIO and VCCSA fit together


 sure, but they kinda address different substructgures... that hopefully get aligned. VSa really feeds the fclk bus (system agent), vccio feeds imc/cache io...
Both voltages are not "more is better" in all cases.


----------



## tw33k

Running 5GHz with AVX 0 stable LLC level 6


----------



## encrypted11

CPUID 906ED CML-S 10+2?


----------



## ssateneth

Managed to get 4133MHz working reliably. didn't touch VCCSA or VCCIO. They're on auto for now. yes, I know, auto sends a lot of volts. I'll work on that later. Currently testing 4133MHz CAS15 with tightened RTL/IO-L's (Planning to be 24/7). Will work on 3rd timings (seems to most strongly impact bandwidth) > primary timings > TREFI + TRFC > rest of secondary timings > final polish. 4000MHz CAS14 is "stable" too (throws an error once every 6 hours or so on memtest86 8.1 pro). Anything past 4133 seems out of reach (Dual rank modules). POST code wildly loops/flickers after a faster than normal 30 > 32 > 35, sometimes landing on 23, rarely on 55; I know 55 is almost definitely RAM failed to train (bad timings). 7F seems to also be RAM training related but less often. 23 is just... hard to diagnose for me so far.

tWTR settings (tWTR, tWTR_S, and tWTR_L) all don't seem to do anything. Can anyone confirm? "tWTR" seems to be a misnomer as same-bank tWTR_S and different bank tWTR_L are their own timings, detected to be 6 and 1 for L and S respectively, regardless of whatever you put in UEFI settings.

Speaking about XI APEX board, in case it wasn't known.


----------



## centvalny

Z390 I-gaming and 9400F


----------



## scgt1

nm found out on asus chat


----------



## NIK1

Does anyone know when the Asus ROG Maximus XI Apex will be available in USA and Canada.


----------



## scgt1

NIK1 said:


> Does anyone know when the Asus ROG Maximus XI Apex will be available in USA and Canada.


Are you able to order from Newegg? Why not just order it there and it will ship from UK. https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...re=Maximus_XI_Apex-_-9SIAD7H8RC1641-_-Product


----------



## crazyea

Hi,

Can anyone who owns the Maximus XI Extreme please test the usb 3 header and see it they have any issues connecting a drive like a seagate backup plus to it? I keep getting constant disconnect and i/o errors. It has even instantly corrupted the file system a couple of times.

I have tried 3 different fractal design 6 r6 usb cables via rma which didnt work on this motherboard but all had zero issues on an IX hero. I also tried an NZXT usb 3 cable from an H500 and it also exhibited the same issues.

Finally I tried a brand new hard drive and it wont even power on.

So for me it seems like this motherboard cant even power a simple mobile drive, but a cheapish motherboard like the IX hero has zero issues doing so.

My concern is that this is an issue with the motherboard itself or if it is just my motherboard with the issues.

Hopefully someone can help me.


----------



## chibi

scgt1 said:


> Are you able to order from Newegg? Why not just order it there and it will ship from UK. https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...re=Maximus_XI_Apex-_-9SIAD7H8RC1641-_-Product



Probably, but not interested in paying the extended markup and potential warranty denial for purchasing out of country.

I contacted ASUS support asking for an ETA for North America availability and the rep said to check the with authorized retailers for an update. :thumbsdow


----------



## TwoCables

Please ignore this post. I am testing a bug where I post a reply to a thread and then it disappears from the New Posts lists.

*Edit:* Ah, it behaves differently than I remember it behaving. Now it pays attention to posts I have clicked. That's not nice, but I get it.


----------



## crazyea

crazyea said:


> Hi,
> 
> Can anyone who owns the Maximus XI Extreme please test the usb 3 header and see it they have any issues connecting a drive like a seagate backup plus to it? I keep getting constant disconnect and i/o errors. It has even instantly corrupted the file system a couple of times.
> 
> I have tried 3 different fractal design 6 r6 usb cables via rma which didnt work on this motherboard but all had zero issues on an IX hero. I also tried an NZXT usb 3 cable from an H500 and it also exhibited the same issues.
> 
> Finally I tried a brand new hard drive and it wont even power on.
> 
> So for me it seems like this motherboard cant even power a simple mobile drive, but a cheapish motherboard like the IX hero has zero issues doing so.
> 
> My concern is that this is an issue with the motherboard itself or if it is just my motherboard with the issues.
> 
> Hopefully someone can help me.





There is a flaw in this board. I took mine in to the store. They tested it with multiple cables and it was the same issue for them. The exchanged the board for me. I brought a new one home, and the same thing happens.

It's pretty sad that a $700 motherboard cant even power a simple mobile drive, when a 3 year old mid range board has no issues at all.

And even at that its kind of nonsense that even trying to connect my drive to this board cause instant corruption to my drive.


----------



## Jpmboy

My seagate 2T portable drive *which I use only for system images* works on my Max11E (and Apex Vi, R5E-10, and R6EO). Not sure what's wrong with @crazyea system.


----------



## crazyea

Jpmboy said:


> My seagate 2T portable drive *which I use only for system images* works on my Max11E (and Apex Vi, R5E-10, and R6EO). Not sure what's wrong with @crazyea system.


It works on the front panel? And it is not just my board. It was board 1, and board 2 which the store swapped after they experienced the same issues in testing.

I have no idea why this is.

How old is your seagate drive? Are you connecting with a single cable or a Y connector. And its the front panelt usb 3.0 right? Because every other port works.


----------



## Jpmboy

crazyea said:


> It works on the front panel? And it is not just my board. It was board 1, and board 2 which the store swapped after they experienced the same issues in testing.
> 
> I have no idea why this is.
> 
> How old is your seagate drive? Are you connecting with a single cable or a Y connector. And its the front panelt usb 3.0 right? Because every other port works.


yeah, front panel USB3.0. NOthing special in the panel. Single cable to the drive (M#SRD00F1, PN# 1KA9AP6-501 2T) the drive runs off the USB power. I can't recall how old the drive is. I have 2 of the same model (a 1T and a 2T). One thing to check is in device manager check that each (actually all USB 2 and 3) hubs are not set to power off to save power...


----------



## crazyea

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, front panel USB3.0. NOthing special in the panel. Single cable to the drive (M#SRD00F1, PN# 1KA9AP6-501 2T) the drive runs off the USB power. I can't recall how old the drive is. I have 2 of the same model (a 1T and a 2T). One thing to check is in device manager check that each (actually all USB 2 and 3) hubs are not set to power off to save power...


I wonder why you have two asmedia 3.1 controllers and I don't? Mine says 3.0, and my intel says 3.1 while yours says 3.0

Also all the turn off power options were checked in mine. I will disable that and try again.

edit: power management didnt help.

edit2: my seagate drive is exactly the same model and part number as yours.


----------



## ssateneth

It seems most of my memory problems were cooling related. Once I got the CPU under chilled liquid, those consistent same bit + random address bit flips went away. I don't need anything higher than 1.075v VCCSA and 1.125v VCCIO for DDR4-4000 dual rank. Bit flips are definitely related to VCCIO (too low = spits out frequent errors where 0x01000000 bit is flipped). In the process of testing 2x16GB 4133MHz C14 dual rank; it's looking promising. 5.3GHz core with AVX2 prime95 needs 1.36 volts and is perfectly fine. 5.2GHz uncore is also stable at 1.46 volts, though AVX loads not possible at that voltage. This is all with respect to 24/7 settings.

XI APEX works well, provided you give the hotpots appropriate cooling.


----------



## ssateneth

What is "CPU Standby Voltage" and why does it AUTO set to 1.6 volts? What should it be? That seems very high for a "CPU" voltage. I used TurboV Core to set to 1.00 and it didn't seem to affect anyhing (HWINFO64 detects that voltage as "VTT" and reported change when changed in TurboV Core)


----------



## Jpmboy

ssateneth said:


> What is "CPU Standby Voltage" and why does it AUTO set to 1.6 volts? What should it be? That seems very high for a "CPU" voltage. I used TurboV Core to set to 1.00 and it didn't seem to affect anyhing (HWINFO64 detects that voltage as "VTT" and reported change when changed in TurboV Core)


The setting is on the bios page with all the main voltages. JUst set it to 1.2V of anything <5.4GHz. Even at 5.8GHz on my 8086K 1.25V is enough.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jpmboy said:


> The setting is on the bios page with all the main voltages. JUst set it to 1.2V of anything <5.4GHz. Even at 5.8GHz on my 8086K 1.25V is enough.


Why do you need this voltage so high on your 8086K?
Default VCCST is 1.02v. What happens if you just put it all the way back down there? Surely your 8086K won't be unstable.
VCCST is used in connected standby (modern standby?) or sleep modes.


----------



## Jpmboy

Falkentyne said:


> Why do you need this voltage so high on your 8086K?
> Default VCCST is 1.02v. What happens if you just put it all the way back down there? Surely your 8086K won't be unstable.
> VCCST is used in connected standby (modern standby?) or sleep modes.


1.2V is not high. Main thing is Auto sets it to 1.6V. I do use sleep (with ramcache) on several rigs here.


----------



## Carillo

Hey guys!

Does anyone knows where i can download the Asus TurboV core program ? z390


----------



## Jpmboy

Carillo said:


> Hey guys!
> 
> Does anyone knows where i can download the Asus TurboV core program ? z390


*this version* works on the Max11E


----------



## Vassilis008

Is there any setting to chose the voltage for the ram at boot/post on the Z390 Maximus xi hero?

The computer posts fine at 3900Mhz C16 (which requires 1.35v, same voltage as xmp), but often fails to post at 4000Mhz+ which requires a higher voltage around 1.4v.

Is the bios boot voltage being fed always the same as the voltage fed in windows 10?


----------



## KedarWolf

Vassilis008 said:


> Is there any setting to chose the voltage for the ram at boot/post on the Z390 Maximus xi hero?
> 
> The computer posts fine at 3900Mhz C16 (which requires 1.35v, same voltage as xmp), but often fails to post at 4000Mhz+ which requires a higher boot voltage around 1.4v.
> 
> Is the bios boot voltage being fed always the same as the voltage fed in windows 10?


Depends on your motherboard really. You can check RAM voltages with HWInfo.


----------



## Vassilis008

KedarWolf said:


> Depends on your motherboard really. You can check RAM voltages with HWInfo.


Thanks for the reply  The main issue that I have is that I cannot get the ram to post past bios quite often at 4000mhz and I'm suspecting that it is because the motherboard doesn't feed enough voltage when the computer is turned on. When it manages to boot into windows, everything works fine and the voltages are correctly reported in hwinfo.

In the Z390 Asus bios settings, I only see one setting to chose the dram voltage (while on the gigabyte motherboards there are two of them, one for training/posting and another for regular use).


----------



## KedarWolf

Vassilis008 said:


> Thanks for the reply  The main issue that I have is that I cannot get the ram to post past bios quite often at 4000mhz and I'm suspecting that it is because the motherboard doesn't feed enough voltage when the computer is turned on. When it manages to boot into windows, everything works fine and the voltages are correctly reported in hwinfo.
> 
> In the Z390 Asus bios settings, I only see one setting to chose the dram voltage (while on the gigabyte motherboards there are two of them, one for training/posting and another for regular use).


Should be RAM on Main BIOS page, that's the training RAM, and there is a RAM Eventual in the BIOS, not sure what section on Z390, that's the RAM you get after booting into Windows.

And yes, you may have issues if you don't set the RAM Eventual as well.

Let me get a screenshot of it from an old post when I had my Maximus X Formula, it should be the same.


----------



## Jpmboy

Vassilis008 said:


> Thanks for the reply  The main issue that I have is that I cannot get the ram to post past bios quite often at 4000mhz and I'm suspecting that it is because the motherboard doesn't feed enough voltage when the computer is turned on. When it manages to boot into windows, everything works fine and the voltages are correctly reported in hwinfo.
> 
> In the Z390 Asus bios settings, I only see one setting to chose the dram voltage (while on the gigabyte motherboards there are two of them, one for training/posting and another for regular use).


The Voltage on the main settings page is Boot voltage, and that will the running V unless you set the Eventual Dram Voltage to a different value (it's in the tweakers submenu). So, if you want to post/train at a higher voltage, use that in the main setting, then use Eventual vdimm to run at a lower voltage.
Or... simply set the main voltage to the amount that boots consistently and if proven stable, leave it at that. DDR4 is perfectly fine running at 1.4-1.45V. There are XMPs with 1.5V. It's not a high value for SLK and CFL memory controllers.


----------



## Vassilis008

Jpmboy said:


> The Voltage on the main settings page is Boot voltage, and that will the running V unless you set the Eventual Dram Voltage to a different value (it's in the tweakers submenu). So, if you want to post/train at a higher voltage, use that in the main setting, then use Eventual vdimm to run at a lower voltage.
> Or... simply set the main voltage to the amount that boots consistently and if proven stable, leave it at that. DDR4 is perfectly fine running at 1.4-1.45V. There are XMPs with 1.5V. It's not a high value for SLK and CFL memory controllers.


Thank you. It seems the issue is not related to training in the end. It's weird because at 3900Mhz C16 the memory is perfectly stable even at 1.35v and the system posts 100% of the time. I even got 3833 Mhz C15 stable around 1.40v. The memory overclocks incredibly well. However, as soon as I put 4000Mhz the system will only post 50% of the time regardless of the latency (C16, C17 or C18) or the voltage fed (as long as it is at least 1.38v, I tried up to 1.5v and it makes no difference). When the computer posts at 4000Mhz, everything is stable and I can get over 5000% HCI memtest with no errrors. Same story for 4133Mhz C17, C18 or C19 where it will only post 5-10% of the time, but it runs perfectly when it is the case. VCCIO/VCCSA seems to have no inpact as long as it is at least 1.2v (I tried up to 1.35v, no difference). Maybe I need to optimize subtimings instead of leaving them on auto.


----------



## Jpmboy

Vassilis008 said:


> Thank you. It seems the issue is not related to training in the end. It's weird because at 3900Mhz C16 the memory it perfectly stable even at 1.35v and the system posts 100% of the time. I even got 3833 Mhz C15 stable around 1.40v. The memory overclocks incredibly well. However, as soon as I put 4000Mhz the system will only post 50% of the time regardless of the latency (C16, C17 or C18) or the voltage fed (as long as it is at least 1.38v, I tried up to 1.5v and it makes no difference). When the computer posts at 4000Mhz, everything is stable and I can get over 5000% HCI memtest with no errrors. Same story for 4133Mhz C17, C18 or C19 where it will only post 5-10% of the time, but it runs perfectly when it is the case. VCCIO/VCCSA seems to have no inpact as long as it is at least 1.2v (I tried up to 1.35v, no difference). Maybe I need to optimize subtimings instead of leaving them on auto.


lots of help here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-178.html#post27928732


----------



## Carillo

Jpmboy said:


> *this version* works on the Max11E


Thanks! Works great


----------



## Vassilis008

Jpmboy said:


> lots of help here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-178.html#post27928732


I managed to consistently boot at 4000C16 and 4133C17 by changing dram sub-timings from mode 1 to mode 2, which is a bit strange because mode 2 timings are supposed to be tighter  I'm still not sure if the Z390 likes 100 or 133 ratio more, they seem to be equally stable from the tests that I have made.


----------



## fleps

Hey guys

Anyone here with a *Z370 Maximus X Hero* with experience of going from fixed voltage OC to adaptive OC can give some tips?

I'll need to update my bios as I'm still on version 0802, as my 8700K @ 5Ghz is requiring 1.39v and I'm hoping to improve this with Adaptive voltage.

EDIT: also, what's the recommended bios? I don't want any of the spectre and other stuff on my board as I saw it impacts performance / OC's right?

Thanks!


----------



## Luck100

fleps said:


> EDIT: also, what's the recommended bios? I don't want any of the spectre and other stuff on my board as I saw it impacts performance / OC's right?
> 
> Thanks!


You can enable/disable spectre & meltdown protections with this. 
https://www.grc.com/inspectre.htm


----------



## bl4ckdot

Luck100 said:


> You can enable/disable spectre & meltdown protections with this.
> https://www.grc.com/inspectre.htm


Does it make a big difference nowadays ?


----------



## GeneO

bl4ckdot said:


> Does it make a big difference nowadays ?


Nope


----------



## Vassilis008

fleps said:


> Hey guys
> 
> Anyone here with a *Z370 Maximus X Hero* with experience of going from fixed voltage OC to adaptive OC can give some tips?
> 
> I'll need to update my bios as I'm still on version 0802, as my 8700K @ 5Ghz is requiring 1.39v and I'm hoping to improve this with Adaptive voltage.
> 
> EDIT: also, what's the recommended bios? I don't want any of the spectre and other stuff on my board as I saw it impacts performance / OC's right?
> 
> Thanks!


If it requires 1.39v under load, it will be tricky to improve it because it's getting close to the danger zone for a 24/7 computer setup. It might be wiser to dial it down to 4.9Ghz imo and operate closer to 1.3v


----------



## Luck100

bl4ckdot said:


> Does it make a big difference nowadays ?


I seem to be able to run a slightly lower Vcore with them disabled.


----------



## Jpmboy

Luck100 said:


> I seem to be able to run a slightly lower Vcore with them disabled.


yeah, this is "confirmation bias". There is not gonna be a difference in needed vcore for stability with or without meltdown, spectre or any of the more recent exploit patches. Just install the most recent bios and all same-dated drivers off the asus web site. You;ll never notice whether or not a microcode patch has been implemented.


----------



## fleps

Vassilis008 said:


> If it requires 1.39v under load, it will be tricky to improve it because it's getting close to the danger zone for a 24/7 computer setup. It might be wiser to dial it down to 4.9Ghz imo and operate closer to 1.3v


Well it's jus a try. On my old z77 / 3570K when I migrated from fixed to offset OC mode, it allowed me more OC or reduced voltage for the same clock, so I'm wonder if it will be the same with this board/cpu.

Also this would allow the CPU to not be on 1.39 all the time which of course is a good thing.

If I can't improve the vcore on load even with offset / adaptive, I'm not too worried about the 1.39 on load.

It's a delided CPU with liquid metal so it runs super cold on normal use / gaming, never see it above 62C.

Is this a good guide to follow? https://edgeup.asus.com/2017/kaby-l...64.1773293010.1555264385-990980536.1550177106

Thanks!


----------



## thlmk

I can't find if the Fractal Design Define C USB 3.0 Front Header fits the ROG Maximus X Code, anybody know? You can see the connectors on page 32/ chapter 1-16 in their manual, but it seems like the Define C uses an older version that needs more pins? https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/m...ODE_UM_WEB.pdf 

It seems like I need a connector like the one on the right, UG31_34, and the Maximus X Code seem to only have one like on the left. Would love to get a clarification by an Fractal and or ASUS representative or if anybody else know. 

Thank you for your answer.


----------



## Jpmboy

thlmk said:


> I can't find if the Fractal Design Define C USB 3.0 Front Header fits the ROG Maximus X Code, anybody know? You can see the connectors on page 32/ chapter 1-16 in their manual, but it seems like the Define C uses an older version that needs more pins? https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/m...ODE_UM_WEB.pdf
> 
> It seems like I need a connector like the one on the right, UG31_34, and the Maximus X Code seem to only have one like on the left. Would love to get a clarification by an Fractal and or ASUS representative or if anybody else know.
> 
> Thank you for your answer.


are these not identical headers?


----------



## Klovnious

Hey,

I've run into a bit of an weird issue with my Maximus XI Apex. I've applied a manual voltage of 1.290v, but when I benchmark it jumps to 1.349v. It doesn't really make sense and I'm struggleing to find out what I'm doing wrong. All power saving modes are off, and Windows power settings is set to High Performance.
I uploaded my settings here aswell. Can anyone see what I am doing wrong? Or is the BIOS version wrong? Running 0905.

Best regards.


----------



## Nizzen

Klovnious said:


> Hey,
> 
> I've run into a bit of an weird issue with my Maximus XI Apex. I've applied a manual voltage of 1.290v, but when I benchmark it jumps to 1.349v. It doesn't really make sense and I'm struggleing to find out what I'm doing wrong. All power saving modes are off, and Windows power settings is set to High Performance.
> I uploaded my settings here aswell. Can anyone see what I am doing wrong? Or is the BIOS version wrong? Running 0905.
> 
> Best regards.


Use higher vdrop setting. No vdrop = higher voltage.


----------



## Jpmboy

Klovnious said:


> Hey,
> 
> I've run into a bit of an weird issue with my Maximus XI Apex. I've applied a manual voltage of 1.290v, but when I benchmark it jumps to 1.349v. It doesn't really make sense and I'm struggleing to find out what I'm doing wrong. All power saving modes are off, and Windows power settings is set to High Performance.
> I uploaded my settings here aswell. Can anyone see what I am doing wrong? Or is the BIOS version wrong? Running 0905.
> 
> Best regards.


try setting LLC to 5 or 4


----------



## Klovnious

Jpmboy said:


> try setting LLC to 5 or 4


Set it to 5 LLC, but still getting 1.344v when benching. 
Upping my voltage to get it stable.


----------



## Jpmboy

Klovnious said:


> Set it to 5 LLC, but still getting 1.344v when benching.
> Upping my voltage to get it stable.


 try disabling cpusvid. and lower LLC until it does not add voltage to the manually set vcore. The voltage under load should droop compared to idle. I see you also have speedstep disabled.., i'd enable speedSHIFT, and all c-states up to (including) C6. Why have windows power plan on high performance?
What bench mark are you "benching"?


----------



## Klovnious

Crashes on lower LLC's, stable on LLC6 but goes all the way up to 1.374 on almost all cores. I couldn't really see any Vdroop, I only saw it applying more voltage.
But now I understand a bit more on how LLC works, and that I need a better cooler than my X62. Thx


----------



## Falkentyne

Klovnious said:


> Crashes on lower LLC's, stable on LLC6 but goes all the way up to 1.374 on almost all cores. I couldn't really see any Vdroop, I only saw it applying more voltage.
> But now I understand a bit more on how LLC works, and that I need a better cooler than my X62. Thx


Are you using manual voltage? 
if you are, vcore should *NOT* rise whatsoever at load, not even at LLC8!
Are you looking at VID or Vcore?
What are you using to monitor voltage? Hopefully not HWmonitor...(use HWInfo64).
That 1.35v thing looks as if you are using adaptive voltage + additional turbo voltage setting.

Try resetting the CMOS and disabling MCE and enter all settings manually. No way that 1.3v with LLC5 would ever read 1.34v at load...just not possible.


----------



## Jpmboy

Falkentyne said:


> Are you using manual voltage?
> if you are, vcore should *NOT* rise whatsoever at load, not even at LLC8!
> Are you looking at VID or Vcore?
> What are you using to monitor voltage? Hopefully not HWmonitor...(use HWInfo64).
> That 1.35v thing looks as if you are using adaptive voltage + additional turbo voltage setting.
> 
> Try resetting the CMOS and disabling MCE and enter all settings manually. No way that 1.3v with LLC5 would ever read 1.34v at load...just not possible.


on many (if not all) implementations of LLC there are settings that add voltage above the set manual vcore under load.
But yeah - you are probably right, he is looking at VID and thinking vcore.


----------



## Klovnious

Falkentyne said:


> Are you using manual voltage?
> if you are, vcore should *NOT* rise whatsoever at load, not even at LLC8!
> Are you looking at VID or Vcore?
> What are you using to monitor voltage? Hopefully not HWmonitor...(use HWInfo64).
> That 1.35v thing looks as if you are using adaptive voltage + additional turbo voltage setting.
> 
> Try resetting the CMOS and disabling MCE and enter all settings manually. No way that 1.3v with LLC5 would ever read 1.34v at load...just not possible.


I'm using HWMonitor, Coretemp and CPU-Z.
For benching I use Cinebench R20 and Prime95
But I have been looking at VID, and not Vcore, which was a dissapointing revelation. I'm getting 1.222-1.234 Vcore when benching, which makes sense from what Der8auer mentions in his video.
https://youtu.be/95Ujni7-fVM?t=922

Thanks for your help guys


----------



## fleps

Well I updated my z370 to Bios 1901 and looks like I really missed the mark on silicon lottery this CPU generation.

To get 5Ghz I need 1.38 vcore on bios, which CPU-Z / HWinfo report 1.376 on idle and 1.392 load.

1.35 gave me BSOD after 5 min of Prime95 and even 1.375 it will start showing WHEA errors after 15 min into stress.

Temps are fine under normal operations, 35 idle to 60c while gaming. I have C-states enabled so the clocks idle, so I guess I won't even try adaptive/offset voltage at this point.

Oh well.


----------



## Vassilis008

I'm about to RMA my maximus hero xi wifi personally because I cannot get rid of the very loud vrm coil whine. I already messed with all VRM settings in bios, C-States, Speedshift, Speedstep, fixed voltage, etc., but nothing helps. Swapping PSU and removing external GPU makes no difference either. The coil whine become worse when moving the mouse at 500 or 1000 polling rate, or when using the Ethernet to download any file from the internet. It's so bad that when you watch a youtube video or netflix, you can hear the vrm coil whine during the download of the data louder than the volume of the video itself. The only way to get rid of it is to put a 100% load or to downclock the CPU to... 800mhz.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Hey guys, I think someone has asked this before but I couldn't find the answer.

Has anyone run a 9900k in a Apex X z370, are there any limitations or issues?
I just have the opportunity to pick one up at a good price to replace my average overclocking 8700k..

Thanks.


----------



## scracy

schoolofmonkey said:


> Hey guys, I think someone has asked this before but I couldn't find the answer.
> 
> Has anyone run a 9900k in a Apex X z370, are there any limitations or issues?
> I just have the opportunity to pick one up at a good price to replace my average overclocking 8700k..
> 
> Thanks.


Im running a [email protected] 1.344V (Load) OCCT large stable on a Maximus X Formula without any issues or limitations, given the Z370 Apex has a better VRM than mine I doubt you would have any issues


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

schoolofmonkey said:


> Hey guys, I think someone has asked this before but I couldn't find the answer.
> 
> Has anyone run a 9900k in a Apex X z370, are there any limitations or issues?
> I just have the opportunity to pick one up at a good price to replace my average overclocking 8700k..
> 
> Thanks.


9900k and Apex X without issue:


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Awesome thanks guys, really didn't want to drop extra on a z390 board if I didn't have to.
Popping in the 9900k will give a few more years use out of the Apex.

This generation has been less than spectacular, still running my ROG GTX1080ti Strix, nothing blew me away at all.


----------



## Masher06

Cross posting this here as it pertains to the Asus Maximus XI Extreme. 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...mus-xi-extreme-dimm-2-m-2-a.html#post27938860


----------



## bl4ckdot

Masher06 said:


> Cross posting this here as it pertains to the Asus Maximus XI Extreme.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...mus-xi-extreme-dimm-2-m-2-a.html#post27938860


Answered there


----------



## scgt1

So just changed over from MVIIIF/6700K to MXIF/9900K. Previous owner states the 9900 runs 5.05 @ 1.285v bclk 101.50 50x 0 AVX offset. Bios settings came a long way when I went up to the VIII and it seems they have come much further in the XIF. So with that said call me an overclocking newb I guess as I haven't overclocked in so long. I'm running 32GB Corsair Vengeance RGB ram 4 x 8GB and I'm on a custom loop. At XMP1 I'm idling in Windows at 33C after being up for about an hour and a half. 

What all should I be looking at? Are there any features I should turn on/off for overclocking then again for general gaming? Chip isn't delidded and using Hydronaut.

Motherboard model: Asus Maximus XI Formula
UEFI Version: 0905
CPU: 9900K
Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB:cmr32gx4m4c3200c16 32GB Hynix A Die
GPU:2 x EVGA GTX 1080 FTW's
SSD/HDDs/Optical drives: Samsung 950 PRO 512GB m.2 NVME/ WD Black 5TB/Liteon Blueray burner
PSU: Enermax Revolution 1050W
USB Devices (model/version number):Mad Catz S.T.R.I.K.E. 3, Roccat Nyth, Logitech G920, Corsair ST100, 
Monitor: Samsung UN43KU7500
CPU Cooler: Heatkiller VI PRO
PC CASE: Corsair Carbide Air 540
Operating system: Microsoft Activated yes/no? Windows 10 Pro x64 yes
Drivers Installed (include version):Newest from all manufacturers
Any third Party temp/voltage software installed: Corsair iCUE, CPUZ, EVGA X1, GPUZ, RealTemp
System Overclocked (provide details)?Currently only on XMP1


----------



## bl4ckdot

scgt1 said:


> So just changed over from MVIIIF/6700K to MXIF/9900K. Previous owner states the 9900 runs 5.05 @ 1.285v bclk 101.50 50x 0 AVX offset. Bios settings came a long way when I went up to the VIII and it seems they have come much further in the XIF. So with that said call me an overclocking newb I guess as I haven't overclocked in so long. I'm running 32GB Corsair Vengeance RGB ram 4 x 8GB and I'm on a custom loop. At XMP1 I'm idling in Windows at 33C after being up for about an hour and a half.
> 
> What all should I be looking at? Are there any features I should turn on/off for overclocking then again for general gaming? Chip isn't delidded and using Hydronaut.


I have mostly the same oc (9900k @ 5GHz, 1.3V, 0 Offset), I'll give you my bios settings tonight when I get home. Heavily inspirated by jpmboy and buildzoid 
In the meantime, you can have a look at this very detailled video :


----------



## scgt1

bl4ckdot said:


> I have mostly the same oc (9900k @ 5GHz, 1.3V, 0 Offset), I'll give you my bios settings tonight when I get home. Heavily inspirated by jpmboy and buildzoid
> In the meantime, you can have a look at this very detailled video


Thanks will take a look.


----------



## Jpmboy

scgt1 said:


> Thanks will take a look.


have a look at the coffeelake overclocking guide linked in my sig. the 9900K is not that different from the 8700K in the main OC settings.


----------



## Wirerat

Wrong thread sry..


----------



## bl4ckdot

scgt1 said:


> Thanks will take a look.


Here we go


----------



## scgt1

Thanks guys will have a look through.


----------



## scgt1

Jpmboy said:


> have a look at the coffeelake overclocking guide linked in my sig. the 9900K is not that different from the 8700K in the main OC settings.


Well 1.243 on vcore is about as far as I got. I wish I kept up with overclocking over the years. The guide so far is great and all just I'm stuck as many things are frozen on auto and don't allow changes. For crying out loud stuck on step 2 LOL. I see no place for multiplier (5th step) I assume this would be the ratio which on the bios monitor currently shows 36x. There is no ratio setting under extreme tweaker or I'm just overlooking it. 

Set cpu svid to auto
Core/cache voltage to manual
Core Cache voltage only has auto there is no pull down to override and set at the vcore from step 1 so I'm stuck. lol


----------



## Jpmboy

scgt1 said:


> Well 1.243 on vcore is about as far as I got. I wish I kept up with overclocking over the years. The guide so far is great and all just I'm stuck as many things are frozen on auto and don't allow changes. For crying out loud stuck on step 2 LOL. I see no place for multiplier (5th step) I assume this would be the ratio which on the bios monitor currently shows 36x. There is no ratio setting under extreme tweaker or I'm just overlooking it.
> 
> Set cpu svid to auto
> Core/cache voltage to manual
> Core Cache voltage only has auto there is no pull down to override and set at the vcore from step 1 so I'm stuck. lol


 the multiplier is on the main settings page in bios. I can dump a zip file of bios screenshots for ya. You can post bios SS simply by putting a USB stick in any port (just not an NTFS formatted stick) and when you hit F12 the screen is dumped to the usb stick as a bmp file. :thumb:
edit: is the bios flashed to the most recent version?


edit: here's some bios screen shots. first thing is to set AI Tuner to manual (or XMP if you want XMP )


----------



## fleps

Well just reporting back about my Z370, I was able to make Adaptive mode working using the guides.

It didn't improved the reported vcore from manual OC, (on load stays at 1.376/1.392), but this is using 1.3700 on bios with LLC6.

If I try LLC5 I need 1.395 on bios that will vdrop to 1.376 on load BUT reported peaks off 1.408 eventually, and I didn't liked that.

So with 1.37 and LLC6 the vcore will stay at 1.2ish on normal use, 1.376 on load with peaks of 1.392 on benchmarks.
Temps peak was 75C on 1 hour run with Prime large FFT, no WHEA errors. 3 RealBench loop with peak of 69C.

*I also learned an interest thing that I didn't know*: if I set my CPU minimum cache ratio above 42, it will not lower the vcore on idle even on Adaptive. So I left minimum at 42 and max at 46.

I'm impressed how silicon lottery can affect a chip, if this wasn't a deliled CPU with AIO it would be impossible to get 5Ghz.

But at least is not the worst one as I know some 8700K just can't hit 5Ghz.


----------



## scgt1

Jpmboy said:


> the multiplier is on the main settings page in bios. I can dump a zip file of bios screenshots for ya. You can post bios SS simply by putting a USB stick in any port (just not an NTFS formatted stick) and when you hit F12 the screen is dumped to the usb stick as a bmp file. :thumb:
> edit: is the bios flashed to the most recent version?
> 
> 
> edit: here's some bios screen shots. first thing is to set AI Tuner to manual (or XMP if you want XMP )


So is the ratio limit the multiplier? I also noticed you set best case scenario which the guide says nothing about at least at the beginning up to the point of me getting stuck. LOL I can't manually enter voltage's like you have even though I selected manual. The only thing in the boxes below was Auto with no pull down arrow to manually enter values. 

I started watching 



 and with that noticed Windows was only seeing 4/8 not 8/16 C/T. Am I that far out of the loop to not be forcing processors through MSCONFIG anymore? Once the box was unchecked and I rebooted I show all 8/16 in task manager. I thought my chip was way down on the Cinebench list with following that video. I mean a 7700K was above my chip ***! lol I guess if it's only utilizing half the cpu you can't expect much from it. Fixed now though. 

On my daily with a 6600K I still have the box checked and processors manually selected and they all show like they should. Maybe it's just something with the newest gen chips where you can't force windows to see it as it does this on it's own it seems. If you force it crap gets screwed up and it only finds half the cpu it appears.


----------



## scgt1

@Jpmboy So with following the above video and scoping your pictures from Bios I found what the actual multiplier is. LOL Frankly I don't like in the vid how he is just says set this voltage up to this level on manual right off the bat. Isn't the purpose to see how high you can go on the lowest voltage possible stable? Just coming out of the box and cranking the voltage sure it works and all but why toss voltage at your chip if you don't need it? Something odd I'm noticing while running Cinebench and watching cpu-z is the multiplier and speed start out what they should be but are dropping to 4.2 during the test. Under load wouldn't it stay at the multiplied number and not drop? 

I also don't understand the difference in auto/adaptive on core/cache voltage (which is the number he just likes to crank up to a level not really knowing if the chip needs that much) Wouldn't they be the same considering adaptive adjusts to what is needed as would auto? 
I currently have it on adaptive and I'm booting to windows at 100/52 along with completing a Cinebench run. I know the real test is running Prime95 for actual stability but I don't think I'm there yet. Need to find the max sweet spot before running through that I think.

Also LLC was on auto and showed to be currently on Level 6 So I manually set it to 6 as he mentioned doing so in the video also.


----------



## fleps

scgt1 said:


> @Jpmboy So with following the above video and scoping your pictures from Bios I found what the actual multiplier is. LOL Frankly I don't like in the vid how he is just says set this voltage up to this level on manual right off the bat. Isn't the purpose to see how high you can go on the lowest voltage possible stable? Just coming out of the box and cranking the voltage sure it works and all but why toss voltage at your chip if you don't need it? Something odd I'm noticing while running Cinebench and watching cpu-z is the multiplier and speed start out what they should be but are dropping to 4.2 during the test. Under load wouldn't it stay at the multiplied number and not drop?
> 
> I also don't understand the difference in auto/adaptive on core/cache voltage (which is the number he just likes to crank up to a level not really knowing if the chip needs that much) Wouldn't they be the same considering adaptive adjusts to what is needed as would auto?
> I currently have it on adaptive and I'm booting to windows at 100/52 along with completing a Cinebench run. I know the real test is running Prime95 for actual stability but I don't think I'm there yet. Need to find the max sweet spot before running through that I think.
> 
> Also LLC was on auto and showed to be currently on Level 6 So I manually set it to 6 as he mentioned doing so in the video also.


I'll be honest with you man: since your first message it's really hard to understand what you are saying.

Jpmboy guide is very straight forward, just follow each step with attention and there's no way stuff isn't clear.

But by your messages looks like you are too anxious or not reading each step with proper attention, and just wanting to skip to the end and reach a good OC, and that's a bad way to approach overclocking.

So my suggestion is that you go back to the guide and read it slowly and pay attention to every step until stuff is clear.
And then you can digg into more detailed stuff if you want.

Or just forget overclocking if you don't have the patience.
It's ok, it's not for everyone to spend an entire weekend changing numbers and doing stress tests.
Just enabling turbo mode these chips will already boost to whatever boost they have and there's no shame on that.

Peace.


----------



## Jpmboy

fleps said:


> I'll be honest with you man: since your first message it's really hard to understand what you are saying.
> 
> Jpmboy guide is very straight forward, just follow each step with attention and there's no way stuff isn't clear.
> 
> But by your messages looks like you are too anxious or not reading each step with proper attention, and just wanting to skip to the end and reach a good OC, and that's a bad way to approach overclocking.
> 
> So my suggestion is that you go back to the guide and read it slowly and pay attention to every step until stuff is clear.
> And then you can digg into more detailed stuff if you want.
> 
> Or just forget overclocking if you don't have the patience.
> It's ok, it's not for everyone to spend an entire weekend changing numbers and doing stress tests.
> *Just enabling turbo mode these chips will already boost to whatever boost they have and there's no shame on that.*
> 
> Peace.


^^ This is too true! Stock clocks are pretty high these days, and going from say 4.7 "per core" to 5.0 (+6%) on all cores is not really a gain you feel in a game that uses 2 to 4 cores.
+1



fleps said:


> Well just reporting back about my Z370, I was able to make Adaptive mode working using the guides.
> It didn't improved the reported vcore from manual OC, (on load stays at 1.376/1.392), but this is using 1.3700 on bios with LLC6.
> If I try LLC5 I need 1.395 on bios that will vdrop to 1.376 on load BUT reported peaks off 1.408 eventually, and I didn't liked that.
> So with 1.37 and LLC6 the vcore will stay at 1.2ish on normal use, 1.376 on load with peaks of 1.392 on benchmarks.
> Temps peak was 75C on 1 hour run with Prime large FFT, no WHEA errors. 3 RealBench loop with peak of 69C.
> *I also learned an interest thing that I didn't know*: if I set my CPU minimum cache ratio above 42, it will not lower the vcore on idle even on Adaptive. So I left minimum at 42 and max at 46.
> I'm impressed how silicon lottery can affect a chip, if this wasn't a deliled CPU with AIO it would be impossible to get 5Ghz.
> But at least is not the worst one as I know some 8700K just can't hit 5Ghz.


the cache thing may be related to the ram frequency ( are you running 4000 or 4200 ram? min cache will be = ram freq, not ram speed). But yeah, cache can use a fair amount of power, generate extra heat, and provide only marginal gains. That said, we all try to run it has high as we can without raising the vcore (much) above what the cores need to be stable (it is basically a free cache OC at that point).


----------



## scgt1

Well with using JJ's video I linked above I was in Windows at 5.2 (100x52) 1.3?v I didn't jot down what the max vcore utilized was. Ran the cpu-z bench, Rogbench, and cinebench all for one pass. (Using adaptive voltage and not just pumping the voltage up like JJ did and using LLC6 as stated in the vid) Considering the real goal of the silicon lottery isn't how much voltage you can dump into a chip but how high the chip will get on the lowest possible voltage all while not nuking itself either. 

Since I was told yesterday I make no sense yet I read back over each post and everything makes sense to me. It's what ever. I've moved back to stock as of this morning and have started ramping the core up following the guide since with watching the video I found out what the multiplier was which is where I was hung following the guide. 

I hit a wall attempting 5.0 (100x50) 1.285v which is what the previous owner said they had the chip to and stopped pushing it further. I then switched what the guide said of LLC5 to what JJ said (considering the vid I posted above is strictly for the 9900K and XI boards) which is LLC6. Doing this allowed ROG bench to not crash which it was doing previously. Switching from LLC5 to LLC6 spiked the times up about 4C to 75C max the max vcore was 1.279 with the bios set on 1.285v. Since I've ran many tests I've increased the ambient temp in our office which could be part of the culprit in the increase in 4-5C temp. I'll work on it some more tomorrow morning when it's cooler. 

I'm getting there.


----------



## Jpmboy

scgt1 said:


> Well with using JJ's video I linked above I was in Windows at 5.2 (100x52) 1.3?v I didn't jot down what the max vcore utilized was. Ran the cpu-z bench, Rogbench, and cinebench all for one pass. (Using adaptive voltage and not just pumping the voltage up like JJ did and using LLC6 as stated in the vid) Considering the real goal of the silicon lottery isn't how much voltage you can dump into a chip but how high the chip will get on the lowest possible voltage all while not nuking itself either.
> 
> Since I was told yesterday I make no sense yet I read back over each post and everything makes sense to me. It's what ever. I've moved back to stock as of this morning and have started ramping the core up following the guide since with watching the video I found out what the multiplier was which is where I was hung following the guide.
> 
> I hit a wall attempting 5.0 (100x50) 1.285v which is what the previous owner said they had the chip to and stopped pushing it further. I then switched what the guide said of LLC5 to what JJ said (considering the vid I posted above is strictly for the 9900K and XI boards) which is LLC6. Doing this allowed ROG bench to not crash which it was doing previously. Switching from LLC5 to LLC6 spiked the times up about 4C to 75C max the max vcore was 1.279 with the bios set on 1.285v. Since I've ran many tests I've increased the ambient temp in our office which could be part of the culprit in the increase in 4-5C temp. I'll work on it some more tomorrow morning when it's cooler.
> 
> I'm getting there.


:thumb:good job. Just FYI, the purpose of LLC is to "compensate for" and not dampen load transition spikes (technically: transient load line over and under shoot. _V_ovs_ in intel's tech docs) that occurs when you change the amp/current flow (read: load) on a voltage clamped circuit (vcore is "clamped" to a frequency whether using manual override or adaptive). These transitiion spikes happen in the millisec time frame and are not something you can see with any std software or even a DMM hooked to the MB. It takes an oscilloscope and sometimes a socket tool. They cause degradation over time. So... what I'm sayin' is rather than meet the vcore needed by the cpu thru decreasing LLC (which is a higher number on ASUS boards. 6 and higher can/will actually add voltage to the bios set value depending on the board and bios version), allowing the chip to run light loads (or idle) at a higher vcore, which have very little current draw, compared to realbench or p95, with the heavy loads showing "healthy" vdroop is a good thing in the long run. Currrent kills, just ask Thomas Edison. 
daaum - what a run-on sentence.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jpmboy said:


> :thumb:good job. Just FYI, the purpose of LLC is to "compensate for" and not dampen load transition spikes (technically: transient load line over and under shoot. _V_ovs_ in intel's tech docs) that occurs when you change the amp/current flow (read: load) on a voltage clamped circuit (vcore is "clamped" to a frequency whether using manual override or adaptive). These transitiion spikes happen in the millisec time frame and are not something you can see with any std software or even a DMM hooked to the MB. It takes an oscilloscope and sometimes a socket tool. They cause degradation over time. So... what I'm sayin' is rather than meet the vcore needed by the cpu thru decreasing LLC (which is a higher number on ASUS boards. 6 and higher can/will actually add voltage to the bios set value depending on the board and bios version), allowing the chip to run light loads (or idle) at a higher vcore, which have very little current draw, compared to realbench or p95, with the heavy loads showing "healthy" vdroop is a good thing in the long run. Currrent kills, just ask Thomas Edison.
> daaum - what a run-on sentence.


Microseconds (us), not milliseconds  If it was milliseconds, a good fluke would pick it up most likely.
Other than that, good advice. Raja even admitted that loadline vdroop is your friend.
The AC loadline value cushions the pain a bit by boosting the CPU power supply (depending on several factors) so you end up with a higher end voltage, as if you were using"less" vdroop (vdroop is still the same as the loadline calibration value, just the input voltage is boosted) than you would in manual voltages. Only works on Auto/offset voltages though.
Seems to add about 100mv at 1.6 mOhms AC loadline compared to 0.01 mOhms.


----------



## Jpmboy

Falkentyne said:


> Microseconds (us), not milliseconds  If it was milliseconds, a good fluke would pick it up most likely.
> Other than that, good advice. Raja even admitted that loadline vdroop is your friend.
> The AC loadline value cushions the pain a bit by boosting the CPU power supply (depending on several factors) so you end up with a higher end voltage, as if you were using"less" vdroop (vdroop is still the same as the loadline calibration value, just the input voltage is boosted) than you would in manual voltages. Only works on Auto/offset voltages though.
> Seems to add about 100mv at 1.6 mOhms AC loadline compared to 0.01 mOhms.


yeah.. these: uSec.


----------



## scgt1

Jpmboy said:


> :thumb:good job. Just FYI, the purpose of LLC is to "compensate for" and not dampen load transition spikes (technically: transient load line over and under shoot. _V_ovs_ in intel's tech docs) that occurs when you change the amp/current flow (read: load) on a voltage clamped circuit (vcore is "clamped" to a frequency whether using manual override or adaptive). These transitiion spikes happen in the millisec time frame and are not something you can see with any std software or even a DMM hooked to the MB. It takes an oscilloscope and sometimes a socket tool. They cause degradation over time. So... what I'm sayin' is rather than meet the vcore needed by the cpu thru decreasing LLC (which is a higher number on ASUS boards. 6 and higher can/will actually add voltage to the bios set value depending on the board and bios version), allowing the chip to run light loads (or idle) at a higher vcore, which have very little current draw, compared to realbench or p95, with the heavy loads showing "healthy" vdroop is a good thing in the long run. Currrent kills, just ask Thomas Edison.
> daaum - what a run-on sentence.


So am I ok to have it on LLC 6 as most of that was flying over my head. LOL vcore was set for max of 1.285v and hwinfo showed 1.279v was the max under the mobo listing which I believe is where I should be looking according to the first part of the guide and the fact I saw the 1.28v listed no where else in the screen shot.


----------



## Jpmboy

scgt1 said:


> So am I ok to have it on LLC 6 as most of that was flying over my head. LOL vcore was set for max of 1.285v and hwinfo showed 1.279v was the max under the mobo listing which I believe is where I should be looking according to the first part of the guide and the fact I saw the 1.28v listed no where else in the screen shot.


What you want to know - if you want to have vdroop - is the difference between the idle voltage (or what vcore you entered in bios) and the vcore you see in hwi while the system is under a high current draw load such as realbench stress test (or even realbench x264 encoder in the RB benchmark). this drop in vcore is what LLC attempts to address. shoot for 20+ mV of droop under load vs idle voltage (you can see this easily by switching back to manual mode, boot into windows and watch for what the vcore value is at idle and what vcore is when under load). In tghe guide there are several screenshots which show hwi data in manual override. If you read thru that section, you should be able to follow the changes made, describing what the actual load vcore (with droop) reading was. I also confirmed the hwi reported vcore with a digital multimeter measuring it off the motherboard.
you're pon the right track (I think  ).


----------



## scgt1

Jpmboy said:


> What you want to know - if you want to have vdroop - is the difference between the idle voltage (or what vcore you entered in bios) and the vcore you see in hwi while the system is under a high current draw load such as realbench stress test (or even realbench x264 encoder in the RB benchmark). this drop in vcore is what LLC attempts to address. shoot for 20+ mV of droop under load vs idle voltage (you can see this easily by switching back to manual mode, boot into windows and watch for what the vcore value is at idle and what vcore is when under load). In tghe guide there are several screenshots which show hwi data in manual override. If you read thru that section, you should be able to follow the changes made, describing what the actual load vcore (with droop) reading was. I also confirmed the hwi reported vcore with a digital multimeter measuring it off the motherboard.
> you're pon the right track (I think  ).


If I'm following correctly vcore is currently set at 1.285v in bios. High current draw with a full run of Realbench max was 1.279v shown in HWI under the mobo on vcore line. Which is only 6 mV droop again if I'm following along correctly. I've been in manual mode the whole time so a bit confused on the remark of switching back to manual mode. Booting into windows for the first time today once everything loads up and without changing anything idle current 1.261v, min was 1.243v, and max was 1.279v. Assuming I'm supposed to be matching the max from yesterday under heavy load vs the current level running vcore once windows boots and without doing anything else idle being 1.261v I'm sitting at a difference of 18 mV. So I'm out of the range by 2mV does this mean it should be increased in bios that much up to 1.287 to be in the safe droop of 20+mV? 

Still shooting for the max the chip can do on lowest vcore but want to make sure I'm not going to nuke it also. LOL All intensive purposes with the benching I did the other day on JJ's video I'm pretty sure it was in the low 1.34?v @ 5.2 (adaptive vcore) running all the tests so I think this is a pretty good chip although must continue testing of course. He did have a ton more changes to certain settings in the bios which weren't in your guide at least not up to the point where I'm working at now. Which is the "tune" the system part directly above where the vcore limits are listed for cooling type. I also just noticed it seems for your droop number your taking the bios number and using the minimum reported vcore as the idle in that case I'm at 42mV difference so I assume that is good since you stated 20+ mV. Just as I typed this last part and looked at HWI the min is now at 1.261v and I haven't been doing anything on that computer. So again it seems the droop is 18mV instead of 42mV since it's just been idling while typing.


----------



## Jpmboy

scgt1 said:


> If I'm following correctly vcore is currently set at 1.285v in bios. High current draw with a full run of Realbench max was 1.279v shown in HWI under the mobo on vcore line. Which is only 6 mV droop again if I'm following along correctly. I've been in manual mode the whole time so a bit confused on the remark of switching back to manual mode. Booting into windows for the first time today once everything loads up and without changing anything idle current 1.261v, min was 1.243v, and max was 1.279v. Assuming I'm supposed to be matching the max from yesterday under heavy load vs the current level running vcore once windows boots and without doing anything else idle being 1.261v I'm sitting at a difference of 18 mV. So I'm out of the range by 2mV does this mean it should be increased in bios that much up to 1.287 to be in the safe droop of 20+mV?
> 
> Still shooting for the max the chip can do on lowest vcore but want to make sure I'm not going to nuke it also. LOL All intensive purposes with the benching I did the other day on JJ's video I'm pretty sure it was in the low 1.34?v @ 5.2 (adaptive vcore) running all the tests so I think this is a pretty good chip although must continue testing of course. He did have a ton more changes to certain settings in the bios which weren't in your guide at least not up to the point where I'm working at now. Which is the "tune" the system part directly above where the vcore limits are listed for cooling type. I also just noticed it seems for your droop number your taking the bios number and using the minimum reported vcore as the idle in that case I'm at 42mV difference so I assume that is good since you stated 20+ mV. Just as I typed this last part and looked at HWI the min is now at 1.261v and I haven't been doing anything on that computer. So again it seems the droop is 18mV instead of 42mV since it's just been idling while typing.


 good to stick with manual until you hone in on the voltages... I actually measure droop with a DMM. But you can use Hwi the same. Manual idle voltage - full load voltage = droop (hopefully it is not a negative number  ) Just test the stability for your usage with the 18mV droop and go from there. 18 is fine. I normally run 40-50mV droop, but that's me.
Unless you do something seriously wrong, you're not going to kill your CPU in the 1.3V range.


----------



## scgt1

Jpmboy said:


> good to stick with manual until you hone in on the voltages... I actually measure droop with a DMM. But you can use Hwi the same. Manual idle voltage - full load voltage = droop (hopefully it is not a negative number  ) Just test the stability for your usage with the 18mV droop and go from there. 18 is fine. I normally run 40-50mV droop, but that's me.
> Unless you do something seriously wrong, you're not going to kill your CPU in the 1.3V range.


So a few posts back you stated: "idle voltage (or what vcore you entered in bios)" With that said is the manual idle voltage what is set in bios for core cache voltage (my case 1.285v) or is it the lowest reported vcore in HWI at idle once windows loads completely? So I know which to calculate from. 

One way it's on a 6mV difference the other way its the 18mV. lol just want to make sure my math is using the right numbers going forward as things are starting to get tighter. 

For giggles I loaded the 5.2 profile from the other day using the JJ video specifically for the 9900K and Asus XI boards ran the tests again to see what that max reported vcore is under full load (1.350v) Temps also didn't get above 73C which is odd since I hit 75C at just 5.0 yesterday. I did notice while testing with that profile the core clock kinda bounces around during the testing 4.7-5.2 which I haven't noticed if the same happens with testing using your guide. So I'm going to reload my 5.0 profile which follows your guide for the fine tuning and run the tests to watch the core during benching to see if it stays steady at 5.0 or fluctuates also. If it stays steady there is something turned on from the JJ workthrough that isn't on for your guide and I need to figure out what it is to keep it locked at 5.2 if it shouldn't be fluctuating. Could be where the temp differences come in. (Higher clock yet lower temps.)

Yep as I suspected there is some setting from the JJ video (5.2 on core) that is allowing the cpu to clock down during RB test. The 5.0 profile using your guide is glued 5.0 through the entire test only changes clocks around on the cpu-z bench. This is the reasoning as to why the 5.2 clock testing yields a lower max cpu temp (73C) vs. the 5.0 using your guide (75C). The vcore with HWI is also staying pretty stable with the settings from your guide vs the JJ guide video where it drops pretty low at idle. Could be where the down clocking during benching is coming from also.

With that said the 5.2 benching is really void as it's not staying locked at 5.2 to get a real test on it being stable. So I just need to dial in the mV question above on if it's the set cora cache in bios I go off or the lowest reported in HWI at idle to know if I'm closer to the 20mV difference or if I'm pretty far off and need to increase voltage to be safer before increasing the multiplier for 5.1 and continuing on. So far it's stable @ 5.0 1.285v 0AVX just using cpu-z, RB, cinbench. Haven't whipped out Prime yet as I'm waiting for the max clock at lowest core voltage first before making sure it's completely stable.


----------



## moorhen2

If your 5.2ghz is downclocking in RB, there is a AVX Offset being used.


----------



## Jpmboy

scgt1 said:


> So a few posts back you stated: "idle voltage (or what vcore you entered in bios)" With that said is the manual idle voltage what is set in bios for core cache voltage (my case 1.285v) or is it the lowest reported vcore in HWI at idle once windows loads completely? So I know which to calculate from.
> 
> One way it's on a 6mV difference the other way its the 18mV. lol just want to make sure my math is using the right numbers going forward as things are starting to get tighter.
> 
> For giggles I loaded the 5.2 profile from the other day using the JJ video specifically for the 9900K and Asus XI boards ran the tests again to see what that max reported vcore is under full load (1.350v) Temps also didn't get above 73C which is odd since I hit 75C at just 5.0 yesterday. I did notice while testing with that profile the core clock kinda bounces around during the testing 4.7-5.2 which I haven't noticed if the same happens with testing using your guide. So I'm going to reload my 5.0 profile which follows your guide for the fine tuning and run the tests to watch the core during benching to see if it stays steady at 5.0 or fluctuates also. If it stays steady there is something turned on from the JJ workthrough that isn't on for your guide and I need to figure out what it is to keep it locked at 5.2 if it shouldn't be fluctuating. Could be where the temp differences come in. (Higher clock yet lower temps.)
> 
> Yep as I suspected there is some setting from the JJ video (5.2 on core) that is allowing the cpu to clock down during RB test. The 5.0 profile using your guide is glued 5.0 through the entire test only changes clocks around on the cpu-z bench. This is the reasoning as to why the 5.2 clock testing yields a lower max cpu temp (73C) vs. the 5.0 using your guide (75C). The vcore with HWI is also staying pretty stable with the settings from your guide vs the JJ guide video where it drops pretty low at idle. Could be where the down clocking during benching is coming from also.
> 
> With that said the 5.2 benching is really void as it's not staying locked at 5.2 to get a real test on it being stable. So I just need to dial in the mV question above on if it's the set cora cache in bios I go off or the lowest reported in HWI at idle to know if I'm closer to the 20mV difference or if I'm pretty far off and need to increase voltage to be safer before increasing the multiplier for 5.1 and continuing on. So far it's stable @ 5.0 1.285v 0AVX just using cpu-z, RB, cinbench. Haven't whipped out Prime yet as I'm waiting for the max clock at lowest core voltage first before making sure it's completely stable.



you are splitting hairs...
1) 2 degrees C is not different. You expect too much accuracy from the DTS. You probably see more spread between cores.
2) as moorhen said, you probably have an AVX offset of 2 from JJ's guide. Realbench (x264) uses AVX instructions
3) focus on one "guide" at a time and get them right. Then compare. It will take time to get use to the new boards and overclocking. There are many good posts in this thread - read back.
4) IMO, don't bother with p95. It's not gonna tell you anything about stability outside of p95. Better off getting ramtest or learning how to use GSAT (google stressapptest). If you realy need a high current (power virus) stress test get OCCT or even INtel Burn Test.
5) things like Hwi, cpuz etc. read an 8-bit vcore signal (SIO) it's resolution is 16mV. so you see 1.280, 1.296.. etc. and donot spend any time thinking about 1.280V and 1.296V being "different". They are essentially the same value. Get a DMM if you want ot know the real vcore (at least as real as the measurement point(s) can be - there is v*drop* in a trace path  )
6) 6 or 18 mV droop is not enough IMO. shoot for 20-40 with LLC 5 and more vcore set in bios.


----------



## scgt1

Jpmboy said:


> you are splitting hairs...
> 1) 2 degrees C is not different. You expect too much accuracy from the DTS. You probably see more spread between cores.
> 2) as moorhen said, you probably have an AVX offset of 2 from JJ's guide. Realbench (x264) uses AVX instructions
> 3) focus on one "guide" at a time and get them right. Then compare. It will take time to get use to the new boards and overclocking. There are many good posts in this thread - read back.
> 4) IMO, don't bother with p95. It's not gonna tell you anything about stability outside of p95. Better off getting ramtest or learning how to use GSAT (google stressapptest). If you realy need a high current (power virus) stress test get OCCT or even INtel Burn Test.
> 5) things like Hwi, cpuz etc. read an 8-bit vcore signal (SIO) it's resolution is 16mV. so you see 1.280, 1.296.. etc. and donot spend any time thinking about 1.280V and 1.296V being "different". They are essentially the same value. Get a DMM if you want ot know the real vcore (at least as real as the measurement point(s) can be - there is v*drop* in a trace path  )
> 6) 6 or 18 mV droop is not enough IMO. shoot for 20-40 with LLC 5 and more vcore set in bios.


That's great and all but the first part wasn't answered so I know specifically what number I'm using for the calculations. Is the idle voltage what is set in bios or is it the voltage reported/measured by what ever means at full windows load with a resting idle? From your guide I thought the idle voltage was the reported min from HWI but the previous message you stated "idle voltage (or what vcore you entered in bios)" so I'm just confused as to where I should be using the number from on calculations. to get the 20-40mV 

I wasn't worried about the 2C I was trying to make a point that it was odd to have the core higher at 5.2 yet it ran cooler then at 5.0 but it seems it was cooler because it was downclocking. I don't think there is an offset set on the saved profile I would have to go back and see. I do believe it has adaptive voltage instead of manual so it could be down clocking due to the system lowering the voltage possibly. Just a green horn here so I dunno was only a thought as to why it drops the clock in RB.


----------



## Falkentyne

scgt1 said:


> That's great and all but the first part wasn't answered so I know specifically what number I'm using for the calculations. Is the idle voltage what is set in bios or is it the voltage reported/measured by what ever means at full windows load with a resting idle? From your guide I thought the idle voltage was the reported min from HWI but the previous message you stated "idle voltage (or what vcore you entered in bios)" so I'm just confused as to where I should be using the number from on calculations. to get the 20-40mV
> 
> I wasn't worried about the 2C I was trying to make a point that it was odd to have the core higher at 5.2 yet it ran cooler then at 5.0 but it seems it was cooler because it was downclocking. I don't think there is an offset set on the saved profile I would have to go back and see. I do believe it has adaptive voltage instead of manual so it could be down clocking due to the system lowering the voltage possibly. Just a green horn here so I dunno was only a thought as to why it drops the clock in RB.


No one here can answer these questions, and what you read with a DMM depends on where you are reading from also.
MLCC socket caps will give different values than on-die sense.

You want the idle voltage? It's not what you want to hear.

Voltage (for both idle and load):
Bios target voltage (millivolts) - (IOUT * Resistance (mOhms)). Iout=Current, Resistance=Loadline slope (VRM loadline Calibration rating in mOhms). Transient /virus mode overshoots and undershoots not factored in.
No one knows the exact mOhms value for each Loadline Calibration level on Asus and Asrock/MSI (Elmor was raging about this earlier; it's a lot more helpful if the exact mOhm value were given!), but I did find them on Gigabyte boards.

To get an accurate reading: attach probe to VCC_Sense lines coming from VRM and ground wrt. VSS_Sense.
VR VOUT on Gigabyte boards and Vcore sensor SIO On Maximus XI boards are within 16mv of VCC_Sense.


----------



## Jpmboy

scgt1 said:


> That's great and all but the first part wasn't answered so I know specifically what number I'm using for the calculations. Is the idle voltage what is set in bios or is it the voltage reported/measured by what ever means at full windows load with a resting idle? From your guide I thought *the idle voltage was the reported min from HWI* but the previous message you stated "idle voltage (or what vcore you entered in bios)" so I'm just confused as to where I should be using the number from on calculations. to get the 20-40mV
> 
> I wasn't worried about the 2C I was trying to make a point that it was odd to have the core higher at 5.2 yet it ran cooler then at 5.0 but it seems it was cooler because it was downclocking. I don't think there is an offset set on the saved profile I would have to go back and see. I do believe it has adaptive voltage instead of manual so it could be* down clocking due to the system lowering the voltage possibly*. Just a green horn here so I dunno was only a thought as to why it drops the clock in RB.


 yeah, just use the idle voltage from HWI.
Adaptive will change voltage in accord with the operating frequency (not the other way round... the freq will not drop because the voltage is changing on this platform). Check the 5.2 settings with a simple benchmark like realbench x264 encode (deselect the other 3 boxes) note the "score" for the x264 bench. Run it 3 times. Then do the same with the manual override 5.0 you have. Compare the scores. :thumb:


----------



## feznz

Jpmboy said:


> you are splitting hairs...
> 1) 2 degrees C is not different. You expect too much accuracy from the DTS. You probably see more spread between cores.
> 2) as moorhen said, you probably have an AVX offset of 2 from JJ's guide. Realbench (x264) uses AVX instructions
> 3) focus on one "guide" at a time and get them right. Then compare. It will take time to get use to the new boards and overclocking. There are many good posts in this thread - read back.
> 4) IMO, don't bother with p95. It's not gonna tell you anything about stability outside of p95. * Better off getting ramtest or learning how to use GSAT (google stressapptest). If you realy need a high current (power virus) stress test get OCCT or even INtel Burn Test.*
> 5) things like Hwi, cpuz etc. read an 8-bit vcore signal (SIO) it's resolution is 16mV. so you see 1.280, 1.296.. etc. and donot spend any time thinking about 1.280V and 1.296V being "different". They are essentially the same value. Get a DMM if you want ot know the real vcore (at least as real as the measurement point(s) can be - there is v*drop* in a trace path  )
> 6) 6 or 18 mV droop is not enough IMO. shoot for 20-40 with LLC 5 and more vcore set in bios.



Would you use GSAT over Realbench because i asume that GSAT is non AVX? 

Just real bench has been my fav stability tool.


BTW got mobo RGB working have no idea what the issue was just started working fine one day, after I had given up.... try so many combinations of installing different Aura software updating Bios reverting back ect


----------



## Luck100

feznz said:


> Would you use GSAT over Realbench because i asume that GSAT is non AVX?


GSAT is just for testing memory.


----------



## fleps

Jpmboy said:


> you are splitting hairs...
> 4) IMO, don't bother with p95. It's not gonna tell you anything about stability outside of p95. Better off getting ramtest or learning how to use GSAT (google stressapptest). If you realy need a high current (power virus) stress test get OCCT or even INtel Burn Test.


The only case I still use and recommend P95 is with the *Large FFTS* mode, which isn't a power virus.

It's basically the fastest initial test you can do to check if your OC voltage is stable.
If is too low it will BSOD within 5 minutes.
If is middle of the pack it will start trowing WHEA errors around 15 minutes mark.
And if you are still missing a 0.050 vcore it will trow it around 1h mark.

Many times in the past my OC passed RealBench / Intel XTU and other stuff to fail on long gaming sessions with an WHEA error, which then for the sake of checking I ran and it didn't passed P95 Large FFTS 1h, so now I just use it as my start point.

Edit: oh, and for memory OC, HyperPi 32M calculation.


----------



## Jpmboy

fleps said:


> The only case I still use and recommend P95 is with the *Large FFTS* mode, which isn't a power virus.
> 
> It's basically the fastest initial test you can do to check if your OC voltage is stable.
> If is too low it will BSOD within 5 minutes.
> If is middle of the pack it will start trowing WHEA errors around 15 minutes mark.
> And if you are still missing a 0.050 vcore it will trow it around 1h mark.
> 
> Many times in the past my OC passed RealBench / Intel XTU and other stuff to fail on long gaming sessions with an WHEA error, which then for the sake of checking I ran and it didn't passed P95 Large FFTS 1h, so now I just use it as my start point.
> 
> Edit: oh, and for memory OC, HyperPi 32M calculation.


cool. Nothing wrong with large FFTs... but don't assume everyone knows which ones to run (like 1344 and higher) I find that x264 and x265 do as well for quick tests. :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

feznz said:


> Would you use GSAT over Realbench because i asume that GSAT is non AVX?
> Just real bench has been my fav stability tool.
> BTW got mobo RGB working have no idea what the issue was just started working fine one day, after I had given up.... try so many combinations of installing different Aura software updating Bios reverting back ect


 yeah, as luck said, GSAT is really for RAM stability (tho it does run a medium current AVX for the test). NIce! These rgb controls on all the vendors are a bit sketchy.


----------



## Martin778

My Apex has been running strong for the last weeks/months. 5.1Ghz 1.22V and haven't touched it since then. Sadly somehow one of the WiFi antenna connectors came loose and fell inside the back IO panel, with the WiFi antenna cable still connected......don't feel like removing the whole MB for this.


----------



## robertr1

So is there any confirmation of the Apex allowing for higher clock with the same voltage or allowing same clocks with lower voltage compared to other boards?


----------



## Jpmboy

robertr1 said:


> So is there any confirmation of the Apex allowing for higher clock with the same voltage or allowing same clocks with lower voltage compared to other boards?


voltage as determined or measured by what? the board or the proper instrumentation?


----------



## Martin778

robertr1 said:


> So is there any confirmation of the Apex allowing for higher clock with the same voltage or allowing same clocks with lower voltage compared to other boards?


No, Apex has broken voltage readouts. Nobody knows what voltage the CPU is getting because it's completely off when compared to all other manufacturers. Also the Vdroop is like 1.24->1.18V (?!).
It's a stable OC board but I do not recommend it at all due to those voltage discrepancies. My opinion is that it should be banned from rankings because it skews people's perception on what a 9900K can do and suddenly everyone on the Apex has a 'golden' chip that runs at much lower voltage than on others.

If you're going to drop crazy money on a Z390 board, you can get the Z390 Dark as well, that one seems to have better layout too (RAM on the Apex is obstructed by the DIMM2 and they run hot).


----------



## Falkentyne

Martin778 said:


> No, Apex has broken voltage readouts. Nobody knows what voltage the CPU is getting because it's completely off when compared to all other manufacturers. Also the Vdroop is like 1.24->1.18V (?!).
> It's a stable OC board but I do not recommend it at all due to those voltage discrepancies. My opinion is that it should be banned from rankings because it skews people's perception on what a 9900K can do and suddenly everyone on the Apex has a 'golden' chip that runs at much lower voltage than on others.
> 
> If you're going to drop crazy money on a Z390 board, you can get the Z390 Dark as well, that one seems to have better layout too (RAM on the Apex is obstructed by the DIMM2 and they run hot).


This is complete, utter hogwash. Might as well ban Gigabyte and MSI too since they have VR VOUT.
Let's all go back to old broken SIO sensors that report a vcore 40-80mv higher than VCC_Sense.

Have you even done your research?
Here allow me to help you along before you keep up this holy crusade against Asus.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-398.html#post27860326
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html


----------



## Martin778

Do we really have to go through this AGAIN AND AGAIN? Pretty much all other manufacturers's boards report the same voltages, only ASUS tried to make the world a better place and failed miserably by causing nothing more than confusion with their half-arsed readouts they call 'more accurate'. 
And don't even start me on the Vdroop on the Apex.....


----------



## Falkentyne

Martin778 said:


> Do we really have to go through this AGAIN AND AGAIN? Pretty much all other manufacturers's boards report the same voltages, only ASUS tried to make the world a better place and failed miserably by causing nothing more than confusion with their half-arsed readouts they call 'more accurate'.
> And don't even start me on the Vdroop on the Apex.....


You didn't watch the video at all did you? You didn't read a single link I posted, did you? You're just sprouting your self delusional fantasies in your make believe voltage world without doing your work.
Have fun.


----------



## Jpmboy

Martin778 said:


> Do we really have to go through this AGAIN AND AGAIN? Pretty much all other manufacturers's boards report the same voltages, only ASUS tried to make the world a better place and failed miserably by causing nothing more than confusion with their half-arsed readouts they call 'more accurate'.
> And don't even start me on the Vdroop on the Apex.....


Vdroop is working fine on my Apex X (and IX for that matter). You just have to learn how to use LLC. I want 50mV droop and can easily do that.
IDK, some folks are just better off buying simpler boards….


----------



## Sirhoodie

Can a Asus Strix Z390-E of -F run a 9900k at 5ghz? Is there any asus board that can under $230?


----------



## fleps

Sirhoodie said:


> Can a Asus Strix Z390-E of -F run a 9900k at 5ghz? Is there any asus board that can under $230?


I don't recommend.

You should check this: https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=250662&d=1548963030

And also watch this:


----------



## Sirhoodie

fleps said:


> I don't recommend.
> 
> You should check this: https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=250662&d=1548963030
> 
> And also watch this:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5NDtS8za8g


Is ASrocks polychrome rgb a good software? The main reason i dont want to buy gigabyte is because of rgb fusion. Also what about Mystic Light?


----------



## fleps

Sirhoodie said:


> Is ASrocks polychrome rgb a good software? The main reason i dont want to buy gigabyte is because of rgb fusion. Also what about Mystic Light?


Las time I had an ASRock board their softwares were good, but this was on the Z77 era =P

I don't have experience with ASRock or any other RGB software besides Aura, but as far I researched a while back, they all have the basic same functions and wonky behavior.

My Aura work 100% and then I go to open it after a while and it trows a fatal error and I need to reinstall.
Go figure why.


----------



## Sirhoodie

fleps said:


> Las time I had an ASRock board their softwares were good, but this was on the Z77 era =P
> 
> I don't have experience with ASRock or any other RGB software besides Aura, but as far I researched a while back, they all have the basic same functions and wonky behavior.
> 
> My Aura work 100% and then I go to open it after a while and it trows a fatal error and I need to reinstall.
> Go figure why.


Can Wifi be added to a maximus hero?


----------



## fleps

Sirhoodie said:


> Can Wifi be added to a maximus hero?


Not sure I understood correctly.
You can add a wifi card/adapter on any motherboard.

And some boards have their "WiFi version", with built-in adapter (Maximus Hero have it).


----------



## Sirhoodie

fleps said:


> Not sure I understood correctly.
> You can add a wifi card/adapter on any motherboard.
> 
> And some boards have their "WiFi version", with built-in adapter (Maximus Hero have it).


Im gonna go with gigabyte who cares about rgb anyway. plus my gpu is gigabyte.
Tell me what you think about this build: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/DYHqjy


----------



## Jpmboy

lol - post back with your 5GHz 9900K on giga... and especially how the ram OC does. Anyway, the strix board will do 5GHz in the right hands.


----------



## Sirhoodie

Whats the  for?


----------



## Sirhoodie

Jpmboy said:


> lol - post back with your 5GHz 9900K on giga... and especially how the ram OC does. Anyway, the strix board will do 5GHz in the right hands.


So i can get the strix board?


----------



## Jpmboy

_Can _you? Of course you can.


----------



## Sirhoodie

? Z390-E yes.


----------



## Sirhoodie

Dude literally every time i refresh the page you edit you post lol


----------



## Sirhoodie

Jpmboy said:


> _Can _you? Of course you can.


Just to be sure. Can i get the Strix z390-E for OC to 5ghz? Yes or no.


----------



## Jpmboy

Sirhoodie said:


> Just to be sure. Can i get the Strix z390-E for OC to 5ghz? Yes or no.


 if the cpu is capable, the Strix is as (or more) capable as any similarly priced board "Z" chipset board. Honestly, the AsRock boards are very good too. Gigabyte will present you with a cumbersome bios that (IMO) is lacking.


edit: don't refresh so much.


----------



## Sirhoodie

Jpmboy said:


> if the cpu is capable, the Strix is as (or more) capable than any similarly priced board "Z" chipset board. Honestly, the AsRock boards are very good too. Gigabyte will present you with a cumbersome bios that (IMO) is lacking.


Its a 9900k. So i think ill go for the Strix z390-e, it has a vrm fan too so i think it will be good for me.


----------



## fleps

Sirhoodie said:


> Im gonna go with gigabyte who cares about rgb anyway. plus my gpu is gigabyte.
> Tell me what you think about this build: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/DYHqjy


I would go with AORUS Ultra, it has wifi and same price as the Strix-E for a much better board



Jpmboy said:


> lol - post back with your 5GHz 9900K on giga... and especially how the ram OC does. Anyway, the strix board will do 5GHz in the right hands.


How do we know he cares about ram OC, considering his setup is using a 3000Mhz ram?

Of course it can do 5Ghz, but are you seriously recommending a Z390 Strix-E over an Aorus Ultra (same price) because you don't like the GB Bios?


----------



## Sirhoodie

I dont care about ram OC, but i want a Easy-to-use or easy-to-learn bios because im not a master at OC'ing.
Also a quality board that doesn't die from me doing 5ghz in 2 months.


----------



## fleps

Sirhoodie said:


> I dont care about ram OC, but i want a Easy-to-use or easy-to-learn bios because im not a master at OC'ing.


Do a little research about OC guides for both vendors and see what you think. IMHO this is totally up for each person and there isn't a simple "X is best".

Some people don't like to learn new software / interface if they are too used to something, I personally don't care if the UX is ok.

While I do have an Z370 Asus board, I watched some OC guide for Aorus boards and didn't felt the bios is complicated.

Gigabyte even have an official OC guide of their own: https://www.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/Global/multimedia/2/file/525/946.pdf
And also this guide (with video) from tweaktown: https://www.tweaktown.com/guides/8812/gigabyte-z390-9th-gen-oc-guide-vrm-thermal-test/index.html


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted, double post from phone.


----------



## KedarWolf

fleps said:


> I would go with AORUS Ultra, it has wifi and same price as the Strix-E for a much better board
> 
> 
> 
> How do we know he cares about ram OC, considering his setup is using a 3000Mhz ram?
> 
> Of course it can do 5Ghz, but are you seriously recommending a Z390 Strix-E over an Aorus Ultra (same price) because you don't like the GB Bios?


Gigabyte BIOS really isn't that bad once I got used to it which wasn't hard at all, only serious issue is not being able to adjust IOLs etc.and no IOL Offset setting but even with that I get 4x8GB 4133Mhz at really tight timings well under 40Ms in AIDA64 on my Gigabyte Z390 Master


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah, I have the x299 gaming 9with a full cover EK monoblock and x299 Gaming MATX. No adaptive, only offset on these (DVID). And the G9 is the flagship x299. It is a very handsome board with every peripheral connector you can think of... but it sit's next to the R6Apex and R6EO. Very tough company.


----------



## Jpmboy

fleps said:


> I would go with AORUS Ultra, it has wifi and same price as the Strix-E for a much better board
> How do we know he cares about ram OC, considering his setup is using a 3000Mhz ram?
> Of course it can do 5Ghz, but are you seriously recommending a Z390 Strix-E over an Aorus Ultra (same price) because you don't like the GB Bios?


 we don't know. 3000MHz sticks can do more, but yeah, many folks just oc the cpu and leave everything else at stock (or some silly XMP). 
I have both brands (and several others too). THe ASUS bios is simply the best, AsRock a close second. Of course Gigabyte's bios is capable... lol, have you ever seen the bios on the x299 Gaming 9? 
I'll recommend ASUS (for the bios) for any novice/new overclocker, every time.


Hey - this is an ASUS Support thread - right? 




fleps said:


> Do a little research about OC guides for both vendors and see what you think. IMHO this is totally up for each person and there isn't a simple "X is best".
> Some people don't like to learn new software / interface if they are too used to something, I personally don't care if the UX is ok.
> While I do have an Z370 Asus board, I watched some OC guide for Aorus boards and didn't felt the bios is complicated.
> Gigabyte even have an official OC guide of their own: https://www.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/Global/multimedia/2/file/525/946.pdf
> And also this guide (with video) from tweaktown: https://www.tweaktown.com/guides/8812/gigabyte-z390-9th-gen-oc-guide-vrm-thermal-test/index.html


Steve (Sin0082) always does a thorough VRM/component eval... and has always recommended Giga's components.


----------



## fleps

Jpmboy said:


> we don't know. 3000MHz sticks can do more, but yeah, many folks just oc the cpu and leave everything else at stock (or some silly XMP).
> I have both brands (and several others too). THe ASUS bios is simply the best, AsRock a close second. Of course Gigabyte's bios is capable... lol, have you ever seen the bios on the x299 Gaming 9?
> I'll recommend ASUS (for the bios) for any novice/new overclocker, every time.
> 
> Hey - this is an ASUS Support thread - right?
> 
> Steve (Sin0082) always does a thorough VRM/component eval... and has always recommended Giga's components.


Yes this is an Asus support thread and it's your thread after all.

But he asked for an opinion here so what can I do.

If both cards were similar on components quality, for sure it's totally subjective to other stuff like Bios features.
But that's not the fact on this matter, for me we can't even compare a Strix-E power phases with the Aorus Master, and they are on the same price point.

And I wouldn't ever put Bios features over components quality to choose a board.


----------



## Sirhoodie

fleps said:


> Do a little research about OC guides for both vendors and see what you think. IMHO this is totally up for each person and there isn't a simple "X is best".
> 
> Some people don't like to learn new software / interface if they are too used to something, I personally don't care if the UX is ok.
> 
> While I do have an Z370 Asus board, I watched some OC guide for Aorus boards and didn't felt the bios is complicated.
> 
> Gigabyte even have an official OC guide of their own: https://www.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/Global/multimedia/2/file/525/946.pdf
> And also this guide (with video) from tweaktown: https://www.tweaktown.com/guides/8812/gigabyte-z390-9th-gen-oc-guide-vrm-thermal-test/index.html


Btw i don't think i mentioned this but i don't want my cpu running at 5ghz all the time, when its idle i want it to downclock, i cant find a gigabyte oc guide that clearly explains this.


----------



## Jpmboy

Sirhoodie said:


> Btw i don't think i mentioned this but i don't want my cpu running at 5ghz all the time, when its idle i want it to downclock, i cant find a gigabyte oc guide that clearly explains this.


Even in manual override the CPU will down clock at idle, the voltage will not tho. Gigabyte DVID will down volt and down clock... eg, dynamic voltage and dynamic frequency.


----------



## Jpmboy

fleps said:


> Yes this is an Asus support thread and it's your thread after all.
> But he asked for an opinion here so what can I do.
> If both cards were similar on components quality, for sure it's totally subjective to other stuff like Bios features.
> But that's not the fact on this matter, for me we can't even compare a Strix-E power phases with the Aorus Master, and they are on the same price point.
> And I wouldn't ever put Bios features over components quality to choose a board.


then take it to a gigabyte thread please.


----------



## Sirhoodie

Jpmboy said:


> Even in manual override the CPU will down clock at idle, the voltage will not tho. Gigabyte DVID will down volt and down clock... eg, dynamic voltage and dynamic frequency.


I can't find a guide on how to do that, do you know any guides?


----------



## Jpmboy

Sirhoodie said:


> I can't find a guide on how to do that, do you know any guides?


 I don't have a gigabyte guide. Check a gigabyte thread for help. WE're OT in this ASUS thread.
Besides, you don't need a guide, just determine the necessary vcore for the frequency you want to run using manual vcore. NOte the VID for that frequency and then set the DVID (offset) in bios to add the mV needed to match the manual override (stable) vcore (add or subtract from the VID as required). Or just use manual override and ignore the idle voltage since it is pretty meaningless (the cpu is not using any current at idle and that's what really matters).
That said, adaptive vcore is very easy on ASUS boards. And I have a guide in the OP


----------



## Sirhoodie

Jpmboy said:


> I don't have a gigabyte guide. Check a gigabyte thread for help. WE're OT in this ASUS thread.
> Besides, you don't need a guide, just determine the necessary vcore for the frequency you want to run using manual vcore. NOte the VID for that frequency and then set the DVID (offset) in bios to add the mV needed to match the manual override (stable) vcore (add or subtract from the VID as required). Or just use manual override and ignore the idle voltage since it is pretty meaningless (the cpu is not using any current at idle and that's what really matters).
> That said, adaptive vcore is very easy on ASUS boards. And I have a guide in the OP


Thanks for your help.


----------



## Robostyle

Is there any Q-code practice related guide for asus boards? (Any board?)

Trying to oc my ram - and this two-digit thing doesn’t help much. Like, “System has transitioned into ACPI mode. Interrupt controller is in PIC mode.” does tell nothing really . Or code 49, that isn’t described at all - though I see it frequently


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Is there any Q-code practice related guide for asus boards? (Any board?)
> 
> Trying to oc my ram - and this two-digit thing doesn’t help much. Like, “System has transitioned into ACPI mode. Interrupt controller is in PIC mode.” does tell nothing really . Or code 49, that isn’t described at all - though I see it frequently


49 usually relates to bad RTLs or failed training of the RTLS. 55 can also show if the timings are so far off that the POST can't even tell if it is DRAM that we stuck in the slots.


----------



## Robostyle

Well, at least now I know how to translate some of them, thanks.

Still, confused about b1 and AC codes. Also, if launch stucks at 2b or 49, is it problem of vRAM/vIO/vSA, or something else?


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> Well, at least now I know how to translate some of them, thanks.
> 
> Still, confused about b1 and AC codes. Also,* if launch stucks at 2b or 49, is it problem of vRAM/vIO/vSA, or something else*?


Yes (and I'm not trying to be funny)


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> Yes (and I'm not trying to be funny)


So, in the end it could be anything; neither you or me, nor anybody on this forum can be 51% sure what actually causes one or another q-code ot pop-up, etc, etc - smth like that?


----------



## Jpmboy

Robostyle said:


> So, in the end it could be anything; neither you or me, nor anybody on this forum can be 51% sure what actually causes one or another q-code ot pop-up, etc, etc - smth like that?


it's dram training which could be insufficient IMC voltage, insufficient IMC PLL,VSA, DSQs, even vcore ... or simply that the timing set is just not gonna work.


----------



## Danesh_italiano

Can someone save my life today?

Bougth a Asus Maximus X Code with good price @ amazon warehouse but it came only with antennas (this is why the good price). The only accessories that i need is the m.2 standoff that screw in direct into the motherboard (not that one to use with m.2 device on vertical with the mounting bracket). I've found the correct model searching the serial number from the plastic bag where the standoff come in (13020-01810800) but found only in one place from chineand it costs 15$ without posting...

Can someone measure this stand off please? Maximus X Code and Formula shares the same pcb m.2 heatsking.

Since i am using Samsung pro 970 1TB, without heatsink the temperate goes to 85C and the heatsink from my old mobo dropped it to 60~65C, so i need the the exact standoff size so the heatsink will make perfect contact with the m.2 device.

Tenkiul all.

EDIT: I just found the correct size. (took one from Asus H270). Thanks.


----------



## Martin778

Does the Maximus XI Apex have a fitting monoblock available? I know Bitspower has one but the availability is nada.


----------



## chibi

Martin778 said:


> Does the Maximus XI Apex have a fitting monoblock available? I know Bitspower has one but the availability is nada.



Bitspower is the only vendor I know of at this time with an Apex XI monoblock. Getting the board without importing from Euro/CN is hard enough. Next hurdle seems to be a monoblock, lol.


----------



## Vassilis008

If someone is running samsung bdie 3200C14, 3600C16 or similar at 4000+Mhz, could you please share all your ram timings? It looks like my Z390 motherboard is very sensitive to them and sometimes refuses to post with auto secondary/tertiary timings. Thanks in advance


----------



## moorhen2

3200 CL14 at 4400 CL17.


----------



## Vassilis008

moorhen2 said:


> 3200 CL14 at 4400 CL17.


Thanks a lot  I guess you change the timings directly in the bios? Or are you doing it after booting into windows?


----------



## moorhen2

Vassilis008 said:


> Thanks a lot  I guess you change the timings directly in the bios? Or are you doing it after booting into windows?


All adjustments set In the bios.


----------



## KedarWolf

Vassilis008 said:


> If someone is running samsung bdie 3200C14, 3600C16 or similar at 4000+Mhz, could you please share all your ram timings? It looks like my Z390 motherboard is very sensitive to them and sometimes refuses to post with auto secondary/tertiary timings. Thanks in advance


This is 4x8GB. G.Skill CL14 3200.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-763.html#post27725498


----------



## Vassilis008

KedarWolf said:


> This is 4x8GB. G.Skill CL14 3200.
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-763.html#post27725498


Thanks Kedar, I guess you also made all adjustments in the bios instead of the Asrock software?


----------



## KedarWolf

Vassilis008 said:


> Thanks Kedar, I guess you also made all adjustments in the bios instead of the Asrock software?


Yes, in BIOS.


----------



## Vassilis008

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, in BIOS.


Thanks a lot 

It's strange but I can't manage to solve some of my ram issues, even when I try the timings suggested on the forum.

The computer posts fine and is stable under memtest, linpack and prime 95 at 3800 C15 (1.50v), 3900 C16 (1.35v), and 4000 C16 (1.40v) in the range of 1.15-1.25v vccio/vccsa (depending on the timings and frequency) with mode 1 or mode 2 secondary/tertiary timings. It's even stable at 1T at some of these frequencies, and the memory works incredible well with tight timings. However it will just refuse to post above 4000 Mhz regardless of the timings (even at cl 20+ and mode 1/2) and voltages (I tried up to 1.5v and 1.35v vccio/vccsa; also tried higher cpu vcore).

When I put the memory sticks on another rig with a different motherboard brand and cpu, they will work at 4266 C17 without any issues.

Is it possible that it's the IMC of the 9900k limiting the overclock? Or it's more likely to be the motherboard and how it trains the memory?


----------



## Jpmboy

Vassilis008 said:


> Thanks Kedar, I guess you also made all adjustments in the bios instead of the Asrock software?


changing the timings once in the OS is not going to work well. JUst set them in bios and F10 to save, retrain to the new timings and let the POST do it's job.


----------



## KedarWolf

Vassilis008 said:


> Thanks a lot
> 
> It's strange but I can't manage to solve some of my ram issues, even when I try the timings suggested on the forum.
> 
> The computer posts fine and is stable under memtest, linpack and prime 95 at 3800 C15 (1.50v), 3900 C16 (1.35v), and 4000 C16 (1.40v) in the range of 1.15-1.25v vccio/vccsa (depending on the timings and frequency) with mode 1 or mode 2 secondary/tertiary timings. It's even stable at 1T at some of these frequencies, and the memory works incredible well with tight timings. However it will just refuse to post above 4000 Mhz regardless of the timings (even at cl 20+ and mode 1/2) and voltages (I tried up to 1.5v and 1.35v vccio/vccsa; also tried higher cpu vcore).
> 
> When I put the memory sticks on another rig with a different motherboard brand and cpu, they will work at 4266 C17 without any issues.
> 
> Is it possible that it's the IMC of the 9900k limiting the overclock? Or it's more likely to be the motherboard and how it trains the memory?


I ended up settling on 3900MHZ on my Asus Maximus X Formula to be 100% stable but with the same 9900k, I get 4133MHZ perfectly stable on my Gigabyte Z390 Master, so your results will vary, even with the same CPU.


----------



## Vassilis008

Jpmboy said:


> changing the timings once in the OS is not going to work well. JUst set them in bios and F10 to save, retrain to the new timings and let the POST do it's job.


That's what I'm trying to do indeed  What's strange is that even with all the training options set at default, the bios will either post within a couple of seconds or the computer will fail to post completely (or post at a lower frequency, i.e. 3900/4000Mhz). On other youtube videos, the training process seems to take much longer than 3-5 seconds, but not in my case.


----------



## Jpmboy

Vassilis008 said:


> That's what I'm trying to do indeed  What's strange is that even with all the training options set at default, the bios will either post within a couple of seconds or the computer will fail to post completely (or post at a lower frequency, i.e. 3900/4000Mhz). On other youtube videos, the training process seems to take much longer than 3-5 seconds, but not in my case.


when it fails to post, what Q-code does the Power On Self Test stop at ?


----------



## Vassilis008

Jpmboy said:


> when it fails to post, what Q-code does the Power On Self Test stop at ?


What usually happens is the following:

1) computer instantly shuts down after I put a frequency above 4000Mhz in the bios, regardless of the timings set in the bios
2) it then restarts once or twice and automatically sets the frequency back to 4000Mhz with a message saying that the memory overclock is now ok. Then, I have to press F1 to enter bios and see the corrected settings (before I press F1 to enter bios, the code is "A2").

There are some very rare occasions when the bios hangs completely after shutting down/restarting 3-4 times. In these occasions I'm usually getting a "04" or a "2E" code, and I need to manually shut down the computer. Again, this almost never happens though.


----------



## Jpmboy

Vassilis008 said:


> What usually happens is the following:
> 
> 1) *computer instantly shuts down after I put a frequency above 4000Mhz, with any timings*
> 2) it then restarts once or twice and automatically sets the frequency back to 4000Mhz with a message saying that the memory overclock is now ok. Then, I have to press F1 to enter bios and see the corrected settings (before I press F1 to enter bios, the code is "A2").
> 
> There are some very rare occasions when the bios hangs completely after shutting down/restarting 3-4 times. In these occasions I'm usually getting a "04" or a "2E" code, and I need to manually shut down the computer. Again, this almost never happens though.


 If you are making those changes (to 4000 with "any timings") while in the OS, yes, it will crash every time. Stop changing frequency AND timings from the OS.

A2 is a normal operating code. It's reading the HDD/SDDs for boot sectors.
The Q-code I'm asking about is after you enter new freq and timings from bios and the POST fails/stalls. It will stop at a specific Q-code which (helps) identify the Self Test than failed.
If you have been changing timings while in the OS (windows) and then allowing the MemOkay system to correct your error, I would clrcmos before attempting to tune ram any further.
Check this thread for help: https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-189.html#post27979464


----------



## Vassilis008

Jpmboy said:


> If you are making those changes (to 4000 with "any timings") while in the OS, yes, it will crash every time. Stop changing frequency AND timings from the OS.
> 
> A2 is a normal operating code. It's reading the HDD/SDDs for boot sectors.
> The Q-code I'm asking about is after you enter new freq and timings from bios and the POST fails/stalls. It will stop at a specific Q-code which (helps) identify the Self Test than failed.
> If you have been changing timings while in the OS (windows) and then allowing the MemOkay system to correct your error, I would clrcmos before attempting to tune ram any further.
> Check this thread for help: https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-189.html#post27979464


Heya,

I never change frequencies or timings in the OS. I only do it in the Bios. As soon as I click "save and exit bios" it just shuts down, even with incredibly relaxed timings and/or higher voltage. Unfortunatly, it doesn't stop at a specific Q-code, it just shutdown instantly and then reboots at 4000Mhz.

edit: of course, the training switch on the motherboard is turned on and all training settings are on auto in the bios


----------



## Jpmboy

Vassilis008 said:


> Heya,
> 
> I never change frequencies or timings in the OS. I only do it in the Bios. As soon as I click "save and exit bios" it just shuts down, even with incredibly relaxed timings and/or higher voltage. Unfortunatly, it doesn't stop at a specific Q-code, it just shutdown instantly and then reboots at 4000Mhz.


disable the MemOkay switch on the motherboard. With it in th e"On" position, the board will search for timings with the newly entered (F10'ed) frequency - see pg 1-10 in your manual. The first time you do this, you may get a q-code 23. JNust hit the reset button. Once you do that, you need to clrcmos before setting the ram freq and timings manually. Again, help is in the DDR4 24/7 thread I just posted.


----------



## Vassilis008

Jpmboy said:


> disable the MemOkay switch on the motherboard. With it in th e"On" position, the board will search for timings with the newly entered (F10'ed) frequency - see pg 1-10 in your manual. The first time you do this, you may get a q-code 23. JNust hit the reset button. Once you do that, you need to clrcmos before setting the ram freq and timings manually. Again, help is in the DDR4 24/7 thread I just posted.


ok thanks a lot  Once I do everything that you wrote, should I leave the memokay switch on the motherboard to off or put it back to on?


----------



## Jpmboy

Vassilis008 said:


> ok thanks a lot  Once I do everything that you wrote, should I leave the memokay switch on the motherboard to off or put it back to on?


if you do not want the memokay system to hunt for timings with the frequency you set then leave it disabled. I have the memokay II system on a few rigs.MBs here and find it needs to be disablked if I want to manually tune the ram freq and timings (which I do).


----------



## Vassilis008

Jpmboy said:


> when it fails to post, what Q-code does the Power On Self Test stop at ?


It stops at the following codes at 4100 Mhz and higher:

61, A6, 23, d4 and CC (the code where it stops is not always the same, depending on the ram settings/timings I put in bios)


----------



## Jpmboy

Scroll up to post 3406. need a lot more info. voltages, timings, exact ram kit, etc and did you clrcmos before trying 4100? This is a ram OC thing. Best to post in the thread I linked above. Lot's of help there. :thumb:


----------



## Vassilis008

Jpmboy said:


> Scroll up to post 3406. need a lot more info. voltages, timings, exact ram kit, etc and did you clrcmos before trying 4100? This is a ram OC thing. Best to post in the thread I linked above. Lot's of help there. :thumb:


Thank you, I will make a post on the other topic when I do some more tests 

I just updated the bios, so I guess this automatically does a clrcmos too. I put very relaxed primary timing at the moment such as 20 20 20 40 and the rest in automatic to try to boot at 4100Mhz, but I keep getting code 61 (and rarely code 23). My ram kit is G.Skill Trident Z RGB F4-3200C14D-16GTZR. I also disabled RBG in the bios, but it doesn't change much. It's just strange that 4000Mhz runs perfectly at 16 16 16 32 (1.40v) and 16 17 17 34 (1.35v), but 4100 just won't boot regardless of voltages or timings.


----------



## KedarWolf

Vassilis008 said:


> Thank you, I will make a post on the other topic when I do some more tests
> 
> I just updated the bios, so I guess this automatically does a clrcmos too. I put very relaxed primary timing at the moment such as 20 20 20 40 and the rest in automatic to try to boot at 4100Mhz, but I keep getting code 61 (and rarely code 23). My ram kit is G.Skill Trident Z RGB F4-3200C14D-16GTZR. I also disabled RBG in the bios, but it doesn't change much. It's just strange that 4000Mhz runs perfectly at 16 16 16 32 (1.40v) and 16 17 17 34 (1.35v), but 4100 just won't boot regardless of voltages or timings.


Sometimes 4133MHz is easier to boot then 4100MHz because it's on the 133 divider and memory sometimes OCs better on that divider.


----------



## Vassilis008

KedarWolf said:


> Sometimes 4133MHz is easier to boot then 4100MHz because it's on the 133 divider and memory sometimes OCs better on that divider.


Heya Kedar, that's true but unfortunately same issue at 4133.


----------



## moorhen2

Vassilis008 said:


> Heya Kedar, that's true but unfortunately same issue at 4133.


What frequency are you running your cache at, drop it to default 43 if you are running it higher.


----------



## Vassilis008

moorhen2 said:


> What frequency are you running your cache at, drop it to default 43 if you are running it higher.


Cache is at default 43


----------



## scracy

Can anyone that owns a Maximus XI Formula confirm whether or not AIDA64 can monitor VRM temperatures? I'm considering an upgrade from Maximus X Formula with which AIDA64 cannot monitor VRM temperatures, any help greatly appreciated.


----------



## moorhen2

scracy said:


> Can anyone that owns a Maximus XI Formula confirm whether or not AIDA64 can monitor VRM temperatures? I'm considering an upgrade from Maximus X Formula with which AIDA64 cannot monitor VRM temperatures, any help greatly appreciated.


I have three Maximus XI boards, and AIDA64 doesn't monitor the VRM temps, try using HWiNFO, which does.


----------



## scracy

moorhen2 said:


> I have three Maximus XI boards, and AIDA64 doesn't monitor the VRM temps, try using HWiNFO, which does.


Thank you so much for clearing that up, sounds to me there is nothing to gain by "upgrading" from MXF to MXIF.


----------



## MonarchX

Anyone know what was updated in ASUS Hero X 2004 BIOS? It says "Performance improvements". I wonder if it's just another performance improvement related Melton or whichever security flaw.


----------



## GeneO

MonarchX said:


> Anyone know what was updated in ASUS Hero X 2004 BIOS? It says "Performance improvements". I wonder if it's just another performance improvement related Melton or whichever security flaw.


I don't have the Hero, I have the Code X, but I think the BIOS updates are essentially the same. 

I don't think there was any performance improvements or security fixes IMHO. ASUS neglected to include the latest CPU microcode and Intel Management Engine firmware, which both have significant security vulnerability fixes. Any other changes in the BIOS besides these two would not involve security fixes and I see no evidence for performance improvements.


----------



## MonarchX

I think they did include the latest Intel MEI.


----------



## SpeedyIV

I updated my Max X Hero (wifi) to BIOS 2004 and have not noticed any improvements or problems. It did update MEI but not CPU ucode. I am on the Fast Ring and my ucode updated to 906EA revision 00B4 when I updated to Windows 10 v1903 build 18917.10000. You can also get the ucode update through a Microsoft update. The exact update Microsoft KB update depends on which version of Windows you are running.


----------



## bl4ckdot

What BIOS do you guys run on M11x ? I'm still on 805 without issue, and as far as I read, new bios don't have performance improvement in their changelog ?


----------



## KedarWolf

There is a new thermal paste, Thermalright TFX which is nonconductive and has an amazing 14.3 W/m.k conductivity. My current Mastermaker Nano has 11 W/m.k conductivity.

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32955394312.html


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Well I bit the bullet and orders a 9900k/Apex XI, going to give the 8700k/Apex X to my wife.
Should be here at the end of the week.
Wish the Apex XI looked more like the X, but hey it's a refresh.

Going to keep the ROG GTX1080ti Strix for another generation, no real benefit grabbing a $2000 RTX card just for early ray tracing...lol


----------



## Vassilis008

New bios for maximus xi series available today: version 1105


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> Well I bit the bullet and orders a 9900k/Apex XI, going to give the 8700k/Apex X to my wife.
> Should be here at the end of the week.
> Wish the Apex XI looked more like the X, but hey it's a refresh.
> 
> Going to keep the ROG GTX1080ti Strix for another generation, no real benefit grabbing a $2000 RTX card just for early ray tracing...lol


Nice!! :thumb:


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> Nice!! :thumb:


I tossed up the idea of trying Gigabyte, but nah Asus more so the Apex has been tried and true, never let me down.
The fleeting idea of wait for Ryzen 3 did cross my mind, but it's hard a sway away from what you know just works. :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> I tossed up the idea of trying Gigabyte, but nah Asus more so the Apex has been tried and true, never let me down.
> The fleeting idea of wait for Ryzen 3 did cross my mind, but it's hard a sway away from what you know just works. :thumb:


That Apex XI is still not retail in the US. Only via 3rd party from the EU.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Question here I am looking at boards and I always worry about problems how is the Asus Code

Im looking into the Gigabyte master or the Asus Xi Code 

I worry about getting RMA or bad reviews online and this and that I want a reliable well built board for my 9900k


----------



## Vassilis008

TMatzelle60 said:


> Question here I am looking at boards and I always worry about problems how is the Asus Code
> 
> Im looking into the Gigabyte master or the Asus Xi Code
> 
> I worry about getting RMA or bad reviews online and this and that I want a reliable well built board for my 9900k


Regarding RMA, Asus is unfortunately as bad as Gigabyte (at least in Belgium). You usually get a refurbished motherboard back after a couple of months with several issues, when the RMA is even accepted (I had a few RMAs refused although the brand new motherboard had very loud coil whine). My first z390 aorus master was defective and randomly rebooted; it also fed 1.35v+ to the 9900k with default settings (4.7ghz) while in reality the cpu was stable at [email protected] under prime 95 avx. The next maximus xi hero had a big coil whine from the VRMs even with c-state disabled which could be heard 5 meters away from the computer. I then received a refurbished motherboard from Asus (7 weeks waiting time and over 30€ in shipping fees from my own pocket) in exchange from the brand new defective one with a damaged socket. After threatening with legal action, the store finally gave me a brand new Asus motherboard which worked perfectly.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> That Apex XI is still not retail in the US. Only via 3rd party from the EU.


It's retail in Australia as well, $646AU, so about $450USD, it's about $200 more than the Gigabyte Aorus Master.

They just release the ROG Strix Matrix GeForce RTX 2080 Ti. that's $3899AUD...:confuseds


----------



## feznz

KedarWolf said:


> There is a new thermal paste, Thermalright TFX which is nonconductive and has an amazing 14.3 W/m.k conductivity. My current Mastermaker Nano has 11 W/m.k conductivity.
> 
> https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32955394312.html


Are you going to order some? I stopped buying from there it was either really good or really bad about 50/50 chance of being satisfied


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> It's retail in Australia as well, $646AU, so about $450USD, it's about $200 more than the Gigabyte Aorus Master.
> 
> They just release the ROG Strix Matrix GeForce RTX 2080 Ti.* that's $3899AUD.*..:confuseds


ugh, buy the time the APEX XI is retail in the US (and not price spiked) there will likely be other options/launches. I mean, I like playing with the Z370/390 series - very snappy stuff for sure. But HEDT is better suited for my needs (and afflictions!  ). Was hard to lay off the 3647 socket stuff. 


feznz said:


> Are you going to order some? I stopped buying from there it was either really good or really bad about 50/50 chance of being satisfied


THat Tim KW pointed out out is good stuff. Lately, I've been using swiftech's tim-mate TIM2 and get better results and durability than I have with TGK, Gelid etc. Cheap too.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> ugh, buy the time the APEX XI is retail in the US (and not price spiked) there will likely be other options/launches. I mean, I like playing with the Z370/390 series - very snappy stuff for sure. But HEDT is better suited for my needs (and afflictions!  ). Was hard to lay off the 3647 socket stuff.


Funny you said that because I was tossing up whether to go back and revisit HEDT, I'm not gaming any where like I used to so who knows what might happen next HEDT generation :thumb:


----------



## bl4ckdot

Hello,
I updated my BIOS to 1105, but it didn't update my ME firmware. Anyone know why ?

I also saw that on the M11E drivers page, there isn't anymore the link to download chipset drivers. Others Z390 board all have their chipset drivers.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Nevermind, fixed the problem with a fresh Windows 10 install, seems Windows 10 really sucks for cloning to another drive.


----------



## Robostyle

XI Gene owners? Does W_PUMP in UEFI allows to choose the source of temp measurement?

And, any info regarding VRM temp probe? I mean, do all XI series have it?


----------



## Vassilis008

Does anyone know if the asus maximus xi hero (wifi) uses T-Typology? Are 4 ram sticks therefore easier to overclock than 2 sticks on them?


----------



## Jpmboy

Vassilis008 said:


> Does anyone know if the asus maximus xi hero (wifi) uses T-Typology? Are 4 ram sticks therefore easier to overclock than 2 sticks on them?


it is t-top, but 4 sticks may not OC "easier". It depends on the sticks and CPu IMC. T-top will be more efficient that daisy-chain configurations when using 4 sticks tho.


----------



## SauronTheGreat

So recently i bought a i9-9900k and a maxmius xi core. So everything is working perfectly fine with stock, XMP I and XMP II bios settings, as i ran all timespy and firestrike tests, played the witcher 3 while streaming for a while. But i have a slight problem. when i am running XMP I or II bios settings mind you cpu is not overclocked by me. when i turn off my system, flip the PSU switch to off from the back. when i turn on while flipping the PSU switch on then pressing the power button on the case, system boots for a second shuts off and then turns on itself after a second then everything is working fine, this only happens when the psu switch at the back is flipped off( Also this issue does not occur when bios is at stock) . so for example if i shut down my system and do NOT flip the psu switch off and then turn on system from the case this issue does not occur. i have tried this with one DIM and also flashedback to the old bios versions still no help. is this a problem ? 

Motherboard model: Asus maximus XI core
UEFI Version: 1105
CPU: i9- 9900K
Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB: G.SKill Trident Z RGB 32gb @ 3200mhz
GPU: Aorus RTX 2080 Xtreme
SSD/HDDs/Optical drives: 512 gb m.2 OS, 512gb regular samsung ssd, 4TB western digital black
PSU: Corsari AX1200i
USB Devices (model/version number):
Monitor: ROG PG278AQ 4K / Asus PB287Q $K
CPU Cooler: custom EK block
PC CASE: corsair 900D
Operating system: Microsoft Windows 10 Education 64bit
Drivers Installed (include version):
Any third Party temp/voltage software installed:
System Overclocked (provide details): No just XMP II setting from board


----------



## Luck100

SauronTheGreat said:


> So recently i bought a i9-9900k and a maxmius xi core. So everything is working perfectly fine with stock, XMP I and XMP II bios settings, as i ran all timespy and firestrike tests, played the witcher 3 while streaming for a while. But i have a slight problem. when i am running XMP I or II bios settings mind you cpu is not overclocked by me. when i turn off my system, flip the PSU switch to off from the back. when i turn on while flipping the PSU switch on then pressing the power button on the case, system boots for a second shuts off and then turns on itself after a second then everything is working fine, this only happens when the psu switch at the back is flipped off( Also this issue does not occur when bios is at stock) . so for example if i shut down my system and do NOT flip the psu switch off and then turn on system from the case this issue does not occur. i have tried this with one DIM and also flashedback to the old bios versions still no help. is this a problem ?
> 
> Motherboard model: Asus maximus XI core
> UEFI Version: 1105
> CPU: i9- 9900K
> Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB: G.SKill Trident Z RGB 32gb @ 3200mhz
> GPU: Aorus RTX 2080 Xtreme
> SSD/HDDs/Optical drives: 512 gb m.2 OS, 512gb regular samsung ssd, 4TB western digital black
> PSU: Corsari AX1200i
> USB Devices (model/version number):
> Monitor: ROG PG278AQ 4K / Asus PB287Q $K
> CPU Cooler: custom EK block
> PC CASE: corsair 900D
> Operating system: Microsoft Windows 10 Education 64bit
> Drivers Installed (include version):
> Any third Party temp/voltage software installed:
> System Overclocked (provide details): No just XMP II setting from board


I'm pretty sure that's normal behavior related to memory OC training on all the Asus Maximus boards.


----------



## KedarWolf

Attached .zip file is the latest ME firmware and update tool for Z390 boards.

Unzip, open an Admin command prompt in the WIN64 folder and use the below command.



Code:


FWUpdLcl64.exe -F cse_image_FWU_Full.bin


----------



## bl4ckdot

KedarWolf said:


> Attached .zip file is the latest ME firmware and update tool for Z390 boards.
> 
> Unzip, open an Admin command prompt in the WIN64 folder and use the below command.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> FWUpdLcl64.exe -F cse_image_FWU_Full.bin


What do we gain / lose with this update ?


----------



## KedarWolf

bl4ckdot said:


> What do we gain / lose with this update ?


Mostly security updates. I tested it with Cinebench R20, zero performance loss.

Edit: Release note: Improved firmware stability


----------



## bl4ckdot

KedarWolf said:


> Mostly security updates. I tested it with Cinebench R20, zero performance loss.
> 
> Edit: Release note: Improved firmware stability


Alright thanks, will do it tonight since I'm on the 1105 BIOS


----------



## slayer6288

Is that version 39 from the website or 40 from station drivers?


----------



## bl4ckdot

slayer6288 said:


> Is that version 39 from the website or 40 from station drivers?


This is the 12.0.39.1431

EDIT : its the v12.0.40.1433


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Attached .zip file is the latest ME firmware and update tool for Z390 boards.
> 
> Unzip, open an Admin command prompt in the WIN64 folder and use the below command.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> FWUpdLcl64.exe -F cse_image_FWU_Full.bin



Intel CSME 12.0 Consumer PCH-H B,A Firmware v12.0.40.1433

from Winraid forum properly modded.


----------



## bl4ckdot

KedarWolf said:


> Intel CSME 12.0 Consumer PCH-H B,A Firmware v12.0.40.1433
> 
> from Winraid forum properly modded.


Hoo.
My bad then, I thought it was the one from the ASUS download page


----------



## Apothysis

Hi! I have an Asus ROG Strix Z390-F and I bought a DMM in an attempt to get more accurate core voltage readings (LLC6 reads as overvolting in HWInfo and CPU-Z), but I have no idea which pins to measure across. Is anyone familiar with the board? Looking for some guidance before I fry something.


----------



## Jpmboy

SauronTheGreat said:


> So recently i bought a i9-9900k and a maxmius xi core. So everything is working perfectly fine with stock, XMP I and XMP II bios settings, as i ran all timespy and firestrike tests, played the witcher 3 while streaming for a while. But i have a slight problem. when i am running XMP I or II bios settings mind you cpu is not overclocked by me. when i turn off my system, flip the PSU switch to off from the back. when i turn on while flipping the PSU switch on then pressing the power button on the case, system boots for a second shuts off and then turns on itself after a second then everything is working fine, this only happens when the psu switch at the back is flipped off( Also this issue does not occur when bios is at stock) . so for example if i shut down my system and do NOT flip the psu switch off and then turn on system from the case this issue does not occur. i have tried this with one DIM and also flashedback to the old bios versions still no help. is this a problem ?
> 
> Motherboard model: Asus maximus XI core
> UEFI Version: 1105
> CPU: i9- 9900K
> Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB: G.SKill Trident Z RGB 32gb @ 3200mhz
> GPU: Aorus RTX 2080 Xtreme
> SSD/HDDs/Optical drives: 512 gb m.2 OS, 512gb regular samsung ssd, 4TB western digital black
> PSU: Corsari AX1200i
> USB Devices (model/version number):
> Monitor: ROG PG278AQ 4K / Asus PB287Q $K
> CPU Cooler: custom EK block
> PC CASE: corsair 900D
> Operating system: Microsoft Windows 10 Education 64bit
> Drivers Installed (include version):
> Any third Party temp/voltage software installed:
> System Overclocked (provide details): No just XMP II setting from board


The double-pump following AC power loss is normal (certainly for any OC, and XMP is an overclock). The same would occur if you had a power failure, unplug the PSU or switch off the PSU. :thumb:


----------



## SteveRo

Thinking of getting a new motherboard - the apex 11 is about $170 more than the z390 gene - is the apex better at memory oc than the gene? thanks!


----------



## Jpmboy

SteveRo said:


> Thinking of getting a new motherboard - the apex 11 is about $170 more than the z390 gene - is the apex better at memory oc than the gene? thanks!


Seems like it is better. worst thing would be to get the genie and then "shoulda, coulda".


----------



## SteveRo

Jpmboy said:


> Seems like it is better. worst thing would be to get the genie and then "shoulda, coulda".


excellent, thanks for getting back. 
I have an apex X now -- i'm planning on getting a 9900k, (a little late to the game -- yes -- I know).
Should i also replace the apex X with an apex 11 ? 
Thanks for all yur help!


----------



## Jpmboy

SteveRo said:


> excellent, thanks for getting back.
> I have an apex X now -- i'm planning on getting a 9900k, (a little late to the game -- yes -- I know).
> Should i also replace the apex X with an apex 11 ?
> Thanks for all yur help!


The Apex X will run that 9900K just fine. Depending on the OC and continuous load, you may want to actively cool the Apex X VRM. Other than that (and better ram OC on the XI) the X is absolutely great for the 9900K... That said, IMO, if you can swing it, a new 9900K and Apex XI, with top-line ram sticks is the best Z390 combo available.


----------



## SteveRo

Jpmboy said:


> The Apex X will run that 9900K just fine. Depending on the OC and continuous load, you may want to actively cool the Apex X VRM. Other than that (and better ram OC on the XI) the X is absolutely great for the 9900K


very good -- I'll try 9900k in the old apex x 

I have both 2x8 sets of b-die -- gskill 3200c14 and 3600c15.
On my old silicon lottery 8700k I was able to get stressapptest stable 4300c17 and 4266c17 (tighter timings)
I hope to push them better on the 9900k?


----------



## Jpmboy

SteveRo said:


> very good -- I'll try 9900k in the old apex x
> 
> I have both 2x8 sets of b-die -- gskill 3200c14 and 3600c15.
> On my old silicon lottery 8700k I was able to get stressapptest stable 4300c17 and 4266c17 (tighter timings)
> I hope to push them better on the 9900k?


Yeah, and if it's not to your liking, yu can always get the XI. Those sticks may run higher than 4300, 4500-4600 is not out of the question with any good B-die SS sticks (1.5+ volts and high VSA). 47-4800 may be easier with the newer tridents or Royals. I have my 8700K/Apex X running 4500c16 on a pair of Royals. A 3600c15 kit just requires higher RTLs to run the same on that rig.


----------



## SteveRo

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, and if it's not to your liking, yu can always get the XI. Those sticks may run higher than 4300, 4500-4600 is not out of the question with any good B-die SS sticks (1.5+ volts and high VSA). 47-4800 may be easier with the newer tridents or Royals. I have my 8700K/Apex X running 4500c16 on a pair of Royals. A 3600c15 kit just requires higher RTLs to run the same on that rig.


Which "newer tridents or Royals" would you recommend for 47-4800? thanks!! 

edit -- also -- when are the coffee lake chips coming down in $ ?? (due to AMD).


----------



## Jpmboy

SteveRo said:


> Which "newer tridents or Royals" would you recommend for 47-4800? thanks!!
> 
> edit -- also -- when are the coffee lake chips coming down in $ ?? (due to AMD).


no idea about future prices... I have the Royal 4800s on the Apex X/8700K right now. (at 4600c16) they do high freqs very well. but high and very tight (like 4000C12-11-11-28) are no better than 3600c16s. Anyway, 4800c-anything is gonna require SA voltage (well) above 1.4V for most 9900Ks, and stability.


----------



## ViTosS

SteveRo said:


> very good -- I'll try 9900k in the old apex x
> 
> I have both 2x8 sets of b-die -- gskill 3200c14 and 3600c15.
> On my old silicon lottery 8700k I was able to get stressapptest stable 4300c17 and 4266c17 (tighter timings)
> I hope to push them better on the 9900k?


Wow I'm jealous of your B-Dies haha, I have [email protected] that the max I can set is [email protected], no matter what DRAM voltage and VCCIO/VCCSA I put I can't go anything lower than that on timings, and I can't even pass the 4000Mhz barrier, tried [email protected], [email protected] and even [email protected] without sucess to even post to BIOS, have to hit Safe Boot all the time to go back to BIOS.

Edit.: Am I missing something in BIOS I can change for trying stability? I mean, feel pretty sad my chip can't even do [email protected] or even anything above 4000Mhz... All I know is change DRAM voltage, change VCCIO/VCCSA voltage and also the timings and frequency of the RAM... Don't know if any other setting in BIOS can help improve my RAM OC.


----------



## SteveRo

ViTosS said:


> Wow I'm jealous of your B-Dies haha, I have [email protected] that the max I can set is [email protected], no matter what DRAM voltage and VCCIO/VCCSA I put I can't go anything lower than that on timings, and I can't even pass the 4000Mhz barrier, tried [email protected], [email protected] and even [email protected] without sucess to even post to BIOS, have to hit Safe Boot all the time to go back to BIOS.
> 
> Edit.: Am I missing something in BIOS I can change for trying stability? I mean, feel pretty sad my chip can't even do [email protected] or even anything above 4000Mhz... All I know is change DRAM voltage, change VCCIO/VCCSA voltage and also the timings and frequency of the RAM... Don't know if any other setting in BIOS can help improve my RAM OC.


what motherboard and processor? gskill 3600c16? sure you have b-die?


----------



## SteveRo

Jpmboy said:


> no idea about future prices... I have the Royal 4800s on the Apex X/8700K right now. (at 4600c16) they do high freqs very well. but high and very tight (like 4000C12-11-11-28) are no better than 3600c16s. Anyway, 4800c-anything is gonna require SA voltage (well) above 1.4V for most 9900Ks, and stability.


well i wont be doing 1.4v sa for 24/7 that's for sure. what volts dram/sa/io did you need for yur Royals?


----------



## ViTosS

SteveRo said:


> what motherboard and processor? gskill 3600c16? sure you have b-die?


Yep, they are Samsung B-Die (double checked with Thaiphoon Burner, CL16-16-16-36 3600Mhz), mobo is Asus Maximus X Hero and CPU is an i7 8700k delidded at 5.0Ghz and 1.280v


----------



## ViTosS

Are you guys using the latest BIOS, chipset and IMEI for 8700k/Asus? I'm on BIOS 1801 and using old chipset and IMEI drivers, not the latest ones available.


----------



## SteveRo

ViTosS said:


> Yep, they are Samsung B-Die (double checked with Thaiphoon Burner, CL16-16-16-36 3600Mhz), mobo is Asus Maximus X Hero and CPU is an i7 8700k delidded at 5.0Ghz and 1.280v


I have the samsung b-die 3600c15 and I'm on a 8700k/apex x. 
does your bios have the raja memory presets? 
try using those to get you started, start with memory speed low -- say 4000
raja's volts might be a little high, keep an eye on that.

memory timings -- presets -- new single sided samsung 2x8 - raja's presets


----------



## SteveRo

deleted


----------



## ViTosS

SteveRo said:


> I have the samsung b-die 3600c15 and I'm on a 8700k/apex x.
> does your bios have the raja memory presets?
> try using those to get you started, start with memory speed low -- say 4000
> raja's volts might be a little high, keep an eye on that.
> 
> memory timings -- presets -- new single sided samsung 2x8 - raja's presets


I just checked and it doesn't have, the only preset for 2x8GB Samsung B-Die Single sets 4000Mhz but says 1.80v in the name of the preset, but I checked it doesn't alter voltage, and I couldn't post also with this preset, the timings were too tight, it was CL13 for 4000Mhz, I also tried keeping the secondary timings and using my actual OC [email protected] and didn't post neither. So I think my motherboard is not good as yours, also your kit is CL15 mine is CL16 stock, maybe I will buy an Z390 Apex for planning to use 9900k in the future, but anyway thank you for your response!


----------



## ViTosS

I'm trying to change my BIOS from 1801 to 1003 and it says ''Selected file is not a proper BIOS'', I tried putting the BIOS in C: drive as I always do and it says that, what do I do?


----------



## SteveRo

ViTosS said:


> I just checked and it doesn't have, the only preset for 2x8GB Samsung B-Die Single sets 4000Mhz but says 1.80v in the name of the preset, but I checked it doesn't alter voltage, and I couldn't post also with this preset, the timings were too tight, it was CL13 for 4000Mhz, I also tried keeping the secondary timings and using my actual OC [email protected] and didn't post neither. So I think my motherboard is not good as yours, also your kit is CL15 mine is CL16 stock, maybe I will buy an Z390 Apex for planning to use 9900k in the future, but anyway thank you for your response!


you might still be able to use that preset as a point of departure.
apply the preset, then -- 
set the speed way down - like 3600 -- maybe lower - maybe 3200
set the volts 1.45, 1.25, 1.25, dramV, sa, io
set the primaries to something reasonable for air/water - maybe 17-18-18-38-360-2T
reboot ...


----------



## nezff

anyone using 
Corsair Memory 

Part #
CMW16GX4M2A2666C16 with the Asus Prime z390a?

Its the Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 16GB kit. Its not on the list, but wondering if it anyone is running it and having good luck.


thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

ViTosS said:


> I'm trying to change my BIOS from 1801 to 1003 and it says ''Selected file is not a proper BIOS'', I tried putting the BIOS in C: drive as I always do and it says that, what do I do?


 why down grade the bios version?
The 4000c12 presets are for benching only (and use 1.8-1.9V.. which may only be assigned to "Eventual Dram Voltage" depending on the author of the preset). If the bios has these extreme benching presets, it likely has Raja's 4133 preset on the z370 platform. (at 1.4V).


----------



## Esenel

I am thinking about replacing my 8086K with an 9900K on my Asus Hero X.
What would be the downside of not upgrading the Mainboard to Z390?

Thanks!


----------



## TMatzelle60

Anyone here with the Maximus XI Code

For a non overclock 9900K is it worth it I hear all the phase BS and all and want to make sure the following

Is Asus reliable since I always worry about DOA and are they well built?


----------



## ViTosS

Is it normal that now that I changed from 8700k to 9900kf using the same motherboard, when I update chipset driver it shows only Z200 series in device manager when I had the 8700k it showed properly Z300 series? Is BIOS, chipset/IMEI version in Asus official website related to this? If I update BIOS or download an older version of the chipset maybe it will show Z300?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Well I've been quiet for a bit around here, I umm tested out x570/3900x for a week, back on a z390 XI Apex/9900k, so that's saying something...

I've got the 9900k at 5Ghz, avx -2, 1.35v, LLC 2, seems stable.
lowered the AVX due to temps, peaks about 82c when running OCCT Small data set, 79c for everything else.
This is under a H150i Pro, in a Lian Li 011 Dynamic, 3 bottom 3 side intakes.

I really miss the look of the previous Apex board, it was unique, now the XI looks like any other board...


----------



## grifers

Hi. I Have 2001 BIOS (asus Z370 E GAMING), I have problem with intel rapid storage. Dont show "Intel rapid storage" from bios (control + I), and I cant create raid partitions. I cant install RAPID STORAGE from desktop too . Hope Undertand me

P.D - I dont have this otion


----------



## Luck100

schoolofmonkey said:


> Well I've been quiet for a bit around here, I umm tested out x570/3900x for a week, back on a z390 XI Apex/9900k, so that's saying something...
> 
> I've got the 9900k at 5Ghz, avx -2, 1.35v, LLC 2, seems stable.
> lowered the AVX due to temps, peaks about 82c when running OCCT Small data set, 79c for everything else.
> This is under a H150i Pro, in a Lian Li 011 Dynamic, 3 bottom 3 side intakes.
> 
> I really miss the look of the previous Apex board, it was unique, now the XI looks like any other board...


Have you tried using PL1/PL2 limits instead of AVX offset? There are plenty of real-world AVX cases (even games) where the power draw is not large but AVX offset doesn't care, it will downclock anyway. With PL1/PL2 you can downclock based on extreme power level instead.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Luck100 said:


> Have you tried using PL1/PL2 limits instead of AVX offset? There are plenty of real-world AVX cases (even games) where the power draw is not large but AVX offset doesn't care, it will downclock anyway. With PL1/PL2 you can downclock based on extreme power level instead.


Ok that's new to me, I'll have a fiddle.
Got any pointers where to start


----------



## Luck100

schoolofmonkey said:


> Ok that's new to me, I'll have a fiddle.
> Got any pointers where to start


PL2 is your short term power limit, tau is how long you can be at PL2, and PL1 is your long term limit. Should be pretty clear from the pic.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1458...ng-an-interview-with-intel-fellow-guy-therien

For Asus, you'll find the settings in the same menu as the IA AC and IA DC settings. This is what Asus calls them:

PL1 = Long Duration Package Power Limit
Tau = Package Power Time Window
PL2 = Short Duration Package Power Limit 

Make your AVX offset 0, set PL1 = PL2 = say 200 watts and Tau=30 seconds, and run your worst case AVX load like Prime95 small. If you overheat in less than 30 seconds, drop PL1/PL2 and try again. Once you're happy with that, try a longer run and see if you overheat. If you do, then lower PL1 (but not PL2) until you can handle the load indefinitely.

The best value of tau depends on your cooler - for air coolers it's usually around 15 seconds because they saturate very quickly. You might find you can use a much longer tau with water.

If you use offset or adaptive voltage for Vcore, the voltage will automatically drop when you downclock due to PL1/PL2 limits which further helps reduce power/heat .


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Luck100 said:


> PL2 is your short term power limit, tau is how long you can be at PL2, and PL1 is your long term limit. Should be pretty clear from the pic.
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/1458...ng-an-interview-with-intel-fellow-guy-therien
> 
> For Asus, you'll find the settings in the same menu as the IA AC and IA DC settings. This is what Asus calls them:
> 
> PL1 = Long Duration Package Power Limit
> Tau = Package Power Time Window
> PL2 = Short Duration Package Power Limit
> 
> Make your AVX offset 0, set PL1 = PL2 = say 200 watts and Tau=30 seconds, and run your worst case AVX load like Prime95 small. If you overheat in less than 30 seconds, drop PL1/PL2 and try again. Once you're happy with that, try a longer run and see if you overheat. If you do, then lower PL1 (but not PL2) until you can handle the load indefinitely.
> 
> The best value of tau depends on your cooler - for air coolers it's usually around 15 seconds because they saturate very quickly. You might find you can use a much longer tau with water.
> 
> If you use offset or adaptive voltage for Vcore, the voltage will automatically drop when you downclock due to PL1/PL2 limits which further helps reduce power/heat .


Right still getting my head around this type of oc.
I've used the settings you recommended, running OCCT Small Data set resulted in a instant down clock, cores bounce around etc, temps well under 70c, which is what we're looking for with those stupidly heavy AVX loads.

OCCT Large Data Set and Medium data set don't down clock at all, temps are quiet low, maxing out at 65c.
Realbench 2.56, temps hit about 78c, but no down clocking after a 15 minute run either.

I'm guessing this is what I'm looking for.

Oh I have a vcore override of 1.300v LLC 5.


----------



## japau

Still at 1003 BIOS on X Apex & 8700k. Is there known & tested improvements in newer BIOSes or are they mostly for 9xxx support?


----------



## KedarWolf

Bit off-topic, but seems Asus X570 boards are the way to go. 

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/66757/asus-gigabyte-msi-x570-boards-better-yours/index.html


----------



## Shawnb99

KedarWolf said:


> Bit off-topic, but seems Asus X570 boards are the way to go.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.tweaktown.com/news/66757/asus-gigabyte-msi-x570-boards-better-yours/index.html




Considering they crapped they bed with their Z390 MB’s glad they are getting it right this time.


----------



## Luck100

Shawnb99 said:


> Considering they crapped they bed with their Z390 MB’s glad they are getting it right this time.


What's wrong with the Z390 MBs?


----------



## Shawnb99

Luck100 said:


> What's wrong with the Z390 MBs?




They were blown away in the VRM department by everyone else and the fact only the Gene and Apex are worth buying, with the fact the Code, Formula are more expensive but are a worse board

Check out Buildzoid’s review of the Apex he goes into detail on the issues.


----------



## Luck100

Shawnb99 said:


> They were blown away in the VRM department by everyone else and the fact only the Gene and Apex are worth buying, with the fact the Code, Formula are more expensive but are a worse board
> 
> Check out Buildzoid’s review of the Apex he goes into detail on the issues.


Right, the VRM thing. I'm a little perplexed why people got so hung up on the VRMs, which are only one piece of the motherboard pie. In practice my VRMs are still around 60C when I'm hitting 100C on the CPU, so I don't see how I'd benefit from beefier VRMs. Probably more of a marketing failure than anything else, as people get worked up when you claim X phases but don't really have them.


----------



## nezff

have a Prime z390a. New build. Bios is 0506. Any reason to upgrade the bios? Im not overclocking, just wondering if there are benefits. Also, Im not having any problems with the board. Running great.


----------



## chibi

Hey there, when using manual voltage on z370/390. Is the following power settings correct?

Advanced\CPU Configuration\CPU Power Management Control

Intel SpeedStep [Auto]
Turbo Mode [Enabled]
CPU C-states [Enabled]
Enhanced C-states [Enabled]
CPU C3 Report [Enabled]
CPU C6 Report [Enabled]
CPU C7 Report [CPU C7s]
CPU C8 Report [Enabled]
Package C State Limit [Cpu Default]
CFG Lock [Disabled]
Intel Speed Shift Technology [Enabled]


----------



## tartmann

That's pretty much default. That's what i have my Asus z370 A set as


----------



## Jpmboy

Shawnb99 said:


> They were blown away in the VRM department by everyone else and the fact only the Gene and Apex are worth buying, with the fact the Code, Formula are more expensive but are a worse board
> 
> Check out Buildzoid’s review of the Apex he goes into detail on the issues.


Bullzoid? you mean Bull'sht. No one here is pushing the VRM package on any z390 board at ambient overclocking. Mid-tier boards are just that and a "better" vrm package with a weak power plane or crap ram architecture is NOT a better board by any measure.


----------



## Nizzen

Jpmboy said:


> Shawnb99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They were blown away in the VRM department by everyone else and the fact only the Gene and Apex are worth buying, with the fact the Code, Formula are more expensive but are a worse board
> 
> Check out Buildzoidâ€™️s review of the Apex he goes into detail on the issues.
> 
> 
> 
> Bullzoid? you mean Bull'sht. No one here is pushing the VRM package on any z390 board at ambient overclocking. Mid-tier boards are just that and a "better" vrm package with a weak power plane or crap ram architecture is NOT a better board by any measure.
Click to expand...

True story 🙂


----------



## KedarWolf

HCI MemTest Pro and MemTest Free compiled AutoHotkey scripts, for a 9900k or 9700k, 16GB and 32GB versions. It opens 16 instances with the memory amount already set for both Free and Pro.

If you go to Task Manager, click Details on MemTest and check each affinity, each one allocated to one separate thread, absolutely the best way to run Memtest!


----------



## CTV

*Asus ROG Maximus XI Apex DIMM.2 wiring direct to CPU (shared with GPU) or via PCH?*

I recently got an Asus ROG Maximus XI Apex as it does not have as much questionable VRM design as the others in the range, bar a few. I have not yet assembled it as I have made an observation with regards to the wiring of the included DIMM.2 slot for SDDs. The manual states that the PCIE 3.0 x16 slot(s?) will run at x8 if SSD are installed in the DIMM.2 as to my understanding it should in principal share the lanes with the GPU and not go through the PCH, though on the specifications tab online it in contrast suggests the DIMM.2 may actually be wired via the PCH instead. I am only using one GPU and I am aware even the mighty 2080Ti just about barely saturates PCIE 3.0 x8, though I would really like to keep the GPU slot running at x16 (future proofing beyond 2080Ti), though together with a Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1TB nvme as primary storage and a single SATA drive as secondary. Any thoughts around this discrepancy of the documentation pertaining to the wiring of the DIMM.2 slot, what is the correct answer? Many thanks.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

CTV said:


> I recently got an Asus ROG Maximus XI Apex as it does not have as much questionable VRM design as the others in the range, bar a few. I have not yet assembled it as I have made an observation with regards to the wiring of the included DIMM.2 slot for SDDs. The manual states that the PCIE 3.0 x16 slot(s?) will run at x8 if SSD are installed in the DIMM.2 as to my understanding it should in principal share the lanes with the GPU and not go through the PCH, though on the specifications tab online it in contrast suggests the DIMM.2 may actually be wired via the PCH instead. I am only using one GPU and I am aware even the mighty 2080Ti just about barely saturates PCIE 3.0 x8, though I would really like to keep the GPU slot running at x16 (future proofing beyond 2080Ti), though together with a Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1TB nvme as primary storage and a single SATA drive as secondary. Any thoughts around this discrepancy of the documentation pertaining to the wiring of the DIMM.2 slot, what is the correct answer? Many thanks.


From what I understand M.2_1 goes to CPU, M.2_2 uses PCH
I have the RTX2080ti on my APEX XI, runs at 16x fine with my 970 Evo Plus in M.2_1, as well as my 1TB Samsung Evo and 3TB WD Black.

MY Apex X was the same, don't stress, you won't loose 16x on the GPU unless you stick in a second RTX 2080ti.. :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

CTV said:


> I recently got an Asus ROG Maximus XI Apex as it does not have as much questionable VRM design as the others in the range, bar a few. I have not yet assembled it as I have made an observation with regards to the wiring of the included DIMM.2 slot for SDDs. The manual states that the PCIE 3.0 x16 slot(s?) will run at x8 if SSD are installed in the DIMM.2 as to my understanding it should in principal share the lanes with the GPU and not go through the PCH, though on the specifications tab online it in contrast suggests the DIMM.2 may actually be wired via the PCH instead. I am only using one GPU and I am aware even the mighty 2080Ti just about barely saturates PCIE 3.0 x8, though I would really like to keep the GPU slot running at x16 (future proofing beyond 2080Ti), though together with a Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1TB nvme as primary storage and a single SATA drive as secondary. Any thoughts around this discrepancy of the documentation pertaining to the wiring of the DIMM.2 slot, what is the correct answer? Many thanks.


As School said, the M.2 slots are PCH linked on Z390. NO effect on PCIE. But if you load Dimm2_2 you will drop a SATA or two.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> As School said, the M.2 slots are PCH linked on Z390. NO effect on PCIE. But if you load Dimm2_2 you will drop a SATA or two.


Well I have a funny story about that, I actually installed 2 Nvme drives on my 8700k/Apex X, not realizing I had 1 of my sata drives connected to the port that gets "disabled" when using 2 drives in the dimm2, but it doesn't get completely, all drives showed up, but the nvme drive would intermittently drop off, not good when it was the boot drive.

The forehead slap moment when you work out what had happen


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> Well I have a funny story about that, I actually installed 2 Nvme drives on my 8700k/Apex X, not realizing I had 1 of my sata drives connected to the port that gets "disabled" when using 2 drives in the dimm2, but it doesn't get completely, all drives showed up, but the nvme drive would intermittently drop off, not good when it was the boot drive.
> 
> The forehead slap moment when you work out what had happen


I think the DIMM.2 slot can run either MVMe or SATA configurations... confusing to both man and machine!


----------



## CTV

schoolofmonkey said:


> From what I understand M.2_1 goes to CPU, M.2_2 uses PCH
> I have the RTX2080ti on my APEX XI, runs at 16x fine with my 970 Evo Plus in M.2_1, as well as my 1TB Samsung Evo and 3TB WD Black.
> 
> MY Apex X was the same, don't stress, you won't loose 16x on the GPU unless you stick in a second RTX 2080ti.. :thumb:





Jpmboy said:


> As School said, the M.2 slots are PCH linked on Z390. NO effect on PCIE. But if you load Dimm2_2 you will drop a SATA or two.


Apologies for the delayed response and many thanks for the input. @schoolofmonkey, you said M.2_1 goes to CPU and M.2_2 uses PCH. How can your GPU run at x16 if you used M.2_1 (shared with GPU/CPU) or am I missing something?

In parallel to starting this thread, I opened a support case with Asus who advised: "...The DIMM.2 slot is connected directly to the CPU and shares bandwidth with the PCIe x16 slot. If you are connecting an SSD in the DIMM.2 slot, the PCIe x16 slot will be limited to x8 as specified in the user manual". I am not convinced and also found different answers from Asus reps on the ROG forums:

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...ximus-XI-Apex-M-2-DIMM-2-Questions#post759167 (Apex)
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?105476-Maximus-XI-Extreme-DIMM-2-slot-question#post738519 (Extreme)

Using this spec comparison https://www.asus.com/Product-Compar...a1IDdqZ,b9Sc2jsphSsiEWDA,IR8wZmrcx55pJkU3&b=2 (see Storage) as a frame of reference from Asus' website, coupled with the fact that only the Apex does not have any non-DIMM.2 based M.2 slots like the Extreme and Gene, I am inclined to think that perhaps both the M.2 slots (the only it has) on the Apex DIMM.2 module is exclusively wired to the PCH, i.e. no M.2 slot wired directly to the CPU, which could mean that the manual might be wrong. What are your thoughts guys?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

CTV said:


> Apologies for the delayed response and many thanks for the input. @schoolofmonkey, you said M.2_1 goes to CPU and M.2_2 uses PCH. How can your GPU run at x16 if you used M.2_1 (shared with GPU/CPU) or am I missing something?


:doh:

I'm still a little confused what the problem is, my configuration is exactly like what you're wanting to run.
Someone has explained to to me a while ago with the 8700k, it's no different for the 9900k, it's something to do with CPU "addressable" PCIe lanes, then non addressable for things like Nvme.

The GPU and other PCie slots are CPU "addressable".

Yes the Sata ports go through the Intel Chipset Controller, which the second m.2_2 port does (PCH), hence why you loose 2 sata ports to get the full speed of the Nvme drive.

All z270/z370/z390 are exactly the same, if you want more cpu "addressable" lanes go Ryzen 3, it has 24, and 24 on the PCH.

:thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

CTV said:


> Apologies for the delayed response and many thanks for the input. @*schoolofmonkey* , you said M.2_1 goes to CPU and M.2_2 uses PCH. How can your GPU run at x16 if you used M.2_1 (shared with GPU/CPU) or am I missing something?
> 
> In parallel to starting this thread, I opened a support case with Asus who advised: "...The DIMM.2 slot is connected directly to the CPU and shares bandwidth with the PCIe x16 slot. If you are connecting an SSD in the DIMM.2 slot, the PCIe x16 slot will be limited to x8 as specified in the user manual". I am not convinced and also found different answers from Asus reps on the ROG forums:
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...ximus-XI-Apex-M-2-DIMM-2-Questions#post759167 (Apex)
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?105476-Maximus-XI-Extreme-DIMM-2-slot-question#post738519 (Extreme)
> 
> Using this spec comparison https://www.asus.com/Product-Compar...a1IDdqZ,b9Sc2jsphSsiEWDA,IR8wZmrcx55pJkU3&b=2 (see Storage) as a frame of reference from Asus' website, coupled with the fact that only the Apex does not have any non-DIMM.2 based M.2 slots like the Extreme and Gene, I am inclined to think that perhaps both the M.2 slots (the only it has) *on the Apex DIMM.2 module is exclusively wired to the PCH*, i.e. no M.2 slot wired directly to the CPU, which could mean that the manual might be wrong. What are your thoughts guys?


 ^^ bolded text is true
on z370 and z390, the DIMM.2 slots are PCIE 3.0 Mode via PCH, all PCIE lanes come from the CPU (obviously) and the 16 are dedicated to the graphics subsystem. The PCH lanes are shared between the sata and dimm.2 (and USB for that matter). When you load the DIMM.2, you loose SATA ports, not gfx lanes. SLI or CFX with two cards will run the cards at 3.0x8, not 3.0x16 (which requires 32 lanes... and socket 1151 only has 16 lanes)

WHere in the Apex XI on-line manual are you seeing this CPU-link DIMM.2 information?


----------



## CTV

Jpmboy said:


> ^^ bolded text is true
> on z370 and z390, the DIMM.2 slots are PCIE 3.0 Mode via PCH, all PCIE lanes come from the CPU (obviously) and the 16 are dedicated to the graphics subsystem. The PCH lanes are shared between the sata and dimm.2 (and USB for that matter). When you load the DIMM.2, you loose SATA ports, not gfx lanes. SLI or CFX with two cards will run the cards at 3.0x8, not 3.0x16 (which requires 32 lanes... and socket 1151 only has 16 lanes)
> 
> WHere in the Apex XI on-line manual are you seeing this CPU-link DIMM.2 information?


The Asus tech guy came back insisting: "I have checked again and there is no indication that the user manual has an error. The PCIe x16 port will be set to x8 whenever a M.2 SSD is installed in the DIMM.2 slot". I am not so sure, i mean look @schoolofmonkey 's screenshots, which makes me want to pursue this even more.

To your question, here is a link to the manual https://1drv.ms/b/s!Anyf-u7YM2QhgUHxnQ5djEWfN7mQ?e=Waw1TM which on page 59 (PDF) states: "When an M.2 is installed to the DIMM.2_1 slot, the PCIEX16/X8 slot will run in X8 mode"

I can already poke holes at the manual as earlier on page 9 it states under the Storage section:

- 1 x M.2_2 Socket 3 with M Key, type 2230/2242/2260/2280/22210 (supports PCIE 3.0 x4 mode)
- 1 x M.2_2 Socket 3 with M Key, type 2230/2242/2260/2280/22210 (supports PCIE 3.0 x4 & SATA mode)

See "M.2_2 Socket 3" is repeated twice? Just a typo? ...perhaps.... I understand using the latter will affect SATAs ports 5 & 6 which I am ok with. I am more interested in the definitive answer about the wiring of the slots for the DIMM.2 module. There are just too many inconsistencies, some sources state both slots will affect x16 GPU lanes, others say only one slot will while the other is PCH, and others suggest PCH for both. Here are two other examples that would imply the latter scenario (both slots to PCH):

1.) Page 45 in the manual: "Intel Optane Technology is only supported by M.2_1 and M.2_2 (DIMM.2) when sourced from the PCH". Wait a second, the only M.2 slots the Apex has is exclusively via the DIMM.2 module, yet there is reference to BOTH slots and PCH. Say what?!

2.) From Asus' own Storage specifications when comparing thew Apex to other motherboards which also utilizes a DIMM.2 module (Extreme & Gene), though these latter ones have additional non-DIMM.2 based slot available whereas the Apex does not (apologies for going to town with all the colors):


----------



## chibi

CTV said:


> The Asus tech guy came back insisting: "I have checked again and there is no indication that the user manual has an error. The PCIe x16 port will be set to x8 whenever a M.2 SSD is installed in the DIMM.2 slot". I am not so sure, i mean look @schoolofmonkey 's screenshots, which makes me want to pursue this even more.
> 
> To your question, here is a link to the manual https://1drv.ms/b/s!Anyf-u7YM2QhgUHxnQ5djEWfN7mQ?e=Waw1TM which on page 59 (PDF) states: "When an M.2 is installed to the DIMM.2_1 slot, the PCIEX16/X8 slot will run in X8 mode"
> 
> I can already poke holes at the manual as earlier on page 9 it states under the Storage section:
> 
> - 1 x M.2_2 Socket 3 with M Key, type 2230/2242/2260/2280/22210 (supports PCIE 3.0 x4 mode)
> - 1 x M.2_2 Socket 3 with M Key, type 2230/2242/2260/2280/22210 (supports PCIE 3.0 x4 & SATA mode)
> 
> See "M.2_2 Socket 3" is repeated twice? Just a typo? ...perhaps.... I understand using the latter will affect SATAs ports 5 & 6 which I am ok with. I am more interested in the definitive answer about the wiring of the slots for the DIMM.2 module. There are just too many inconsistencies, some sources state both slots will affect x16 GPU lanes, others say only one slot will while the other is PCH, and others suggest PCH for both. Here are two other examples that would imply the latter scenario (both slots to PCH):
> 
> 1.) Page 45 in the manual: "Intel Optane Technology is only supported by M.2_1 and M.2_2 (DIMM.2) when sourced from the PCH". Wait a second, the only M.2 slots the Apex has is exclusively via the DIMM.2 module, yet there is reference to BOTH slots and PCH. Say what?!
> 
> 2.) From Asus' own Storage specifications when comparing thew Apex to other motherboards which also utilizes a DIMM.2 module (Extreme & Gene), though these latter ones have additional non-DIMM.2 based slot available whereas the Apex does not (apologies for going to town with all the colors):



So can you not just bread board the components on the mobo box and test it yourself? If you're not satisfied, just return the board.


----------



## Jpmboy

CTV said:


> The Asus tech guy came back insisting: "I have checked again and there is no indication that the user manual has an error. The PCIe x16 port will be set to x8 whenever a M.2 SSD is installed in the DIMM.2 slot". I am not so sure, i mean look @*schoolofmonkey* 's screenshots, which makes me want to pursue this even more.
> 
> To your question, here is a link to the manual https://1drv.ms/b/s!Anyf-u7YM2QhgUHxnQ5djEWfN7mQ?e=Waw1TM which on page 59 (PDF) states: "When an M.2 is installed to the DIMM.2_1 slot, the PCIEX16/X8 slot will run in X8 mode"
> 
> I can already poke holes at the manual as earlier on page 9 it states under the Storage section:
> 
> - 1 x M.2_2 Socket 3 with M Key, type 2230/2242/2260/2280/22210 (supports PCIE 3.0 x4 mode)
> - 1 x M.2_2 Socket 3 with M Key, type 2230/2242/2260/2280/22210 (supports PCIE 3.0 x4 & SATA mode)
> 
> See "M.2_2 Socket 3" is repeated twice? Just a typo? ...perhaps.... I understand using the latter will affect SATAs ports 5 & 6 which I am ok with. I am more interested in the definitive answer about the wiring of the slots for the DIMM.2 module. There are just too many inconsistencies, some sources state both slots will affect x16 GPU lanes, others say only one slot will while the other is PCH, and others suggest PCH for both. Here are two other examples that would imply the latter scenario (both slots to PCH):
> 
> 1.) Page 45 in the manual: "Intel Optane Technology is only supported by M.2_1 and M.2_2 (DIMM.2) when sourced from the PCH". Wait a second, the only M.2 slots the Apex has is exclusively via the DIMM.2 module, yet there is reference to BOTH slots and PCH. Say what?!
> 
> 2.) From Asus' own Storage specifications when comparing thew Apex to other motherboards which also utilizes a DIMM.2 module (Extreme & Gene), though these latter ones have additional non-DIMM.2 based slot available whereas the Apex does not (apologies for going to town with all the colors):


 okay, I see the point of confusion... you will be using a single GPU in PCIEx16_1, this will run at x16 whether you use the DIMM.2 slot or not. Slot 2 (PCIEx16_2) would be x8 with DIMM.2 populated - this is according to the manual as you say. So, bottom line - with 1 GPU, slot 1 is x16 no matter what you do with the DIMM.2 slots. 

Manuals do have mistakes now and then - ASUS will correct the online version if the mistake is verified.
I'm running 2 TXps on my z370 APEX - both cards are at x8 with DIMM.2 and an Intel 700 in the x4 slot.


----------



## dboythagr8

I am having an issue with my Maximus XI Extreme and overclocking. If there's an official thread, I apologize, I can't seem to find it.

I am trying to overclock my 9900k to 5.0. My settings in the BIOS are as follows:

BIOS - 1105
CPU Ratio - 50
CPU Current - 140%
Voltage - 1.375 (ends up running around 1.35 due to vdroop, see pic)
LLC - 7
MCE - Disabled
XMP 1
CPU Cache (might be in correct name) that prevents throttling - 255.50


I run Cinebench and it does not stay at 5ghz. In fact it drops as low as 3.2ghz. I've done it 3 times and it's done it each time. It will not hold at 5ghz or even close under load, but during regular desktop use like now, It's showing 5ghz or so for all cores. What is going on here? Am I missing a setting somewhere?


----------



## Jpmboy

dboythagr8 said:


> I am having an issue with my Maximus XI Extreme and overclocking. If there's an official thread, I apologize, I can't seem to find it.
> 
> I am trying to overclock my 9900k to 5.0. My settings in the BIOS are as follows:
> 
> BIOS - 1105
> CPU Ratio - 50
> CPU Current - 140%
> Voltage - 1.375 (ends up running around 1.35 due to vdroop, see pic)
> LLC - 7
> MCE - Disabled
> XMP 1
> CPU Cache (might be in correct name) that prevents throttling - 255.50
> 
> 
> I run Cinebench and it does not stay at 5ghz. In fact it drops as low as 3.2ghz. I've done it 3 times and it's done it each time. It will not hold at 5ghz or even close under load, but during regular desktop use like now, It's showing 5ghz or so for all cores. What is going on here? Am I missing a setting somewhere?


what temperature is it hitting in CB R15 or R20? 1.35V may be light...


----------



## dboythagr8

Should mention that I'm using a H115i Platinum as well.

So I ran it again with MCE Enabled, and that was the only way to keep all cores at 5ghz. Below is the HWinfo from that run. With MCE Disabled temps maxed out at 92c and again dipped as low as 3.2ghz during the CB run.


----------



## dboythagr8

Ran it again, this time with voltage upped to 1.4 Still doing it. Check the image. Do I potentially have a faulty board? It shouldn't be doing this with the settings I have enabled, including the ones that are supposed to prevent throttling.


----------



## Jpmboy

dboythagr8 said:


> Ran it again, this time with voltage upped to 1.4 Still doing it. Check the image. Do I potentially have a faulty board? It shouldn't be doing this with the settings I have enabled, including the ones that are supposed to prevent throttling.


I doubt it's a faulty board. More likely a power limit setting in Bios working with Windows 10 P-states. POst up a text file with the bios settings. (bios, ASUS profile page, USB stick in any port, alt-F2 should drop a txt file to the USB stick.) :thumb:


----------



## tartmann

I'm going to guess it's hitting the stock power limit. MCE usually increases the power limits and durations of them.


----------



## BrunoOC

Try setting the Power profile to High Performance, in Windows.


----------



## Shawnb99

Jpmboy said:


> okay, I see the point of confusion... you will be using a single GPU in PCIEx16_1, this will run at x16 whether you use the DIMM.2 slot or not. Slot 2 (PCIEx16_2) would be x8 with DIMM.2 populated - this is according to the manual as you say. So, bottom line - with 1 GPU, slot 1 is x16 no matter what you do with the DIMM.2 slots.
> 
> Manuals do have mistakes now and then - ASUS will correct the online version if the mistake is verified.
> I'm running 2 TXps on my z370 APEX - both cards are at x8 with DIMM.2 and an Intel 700 in the x4 slot.




The Dimm.2 slot should be using the PCH lanes. The manual is wrong. I know because I have 2 drives in the slot and am using 2 more drives on my Hyper M.2 card which shouldn’t be possible if the Dimm was using the PCIE lanes. 
The GPU takes up 8 lanes leaving me with 4x4 lanes. As each drive on the Hyper M.2 is using each of the x4 lanes that leaves nothing for the Dimm slot hence it must use the PCH lanes.


----------



## nezff

Asus prime z390a motherboard, H100i plat cooler, i5 9600k.

UEFI bios: CPU core ratio is set to AUTO. Sync all cores? Im not overclocking, just wondering why I wouldnt sync.

The Asus multi core enhancement is set to AUTO. disable?

any advice would be greatly appreciated.

thanks in advance.


----------



## TMatzelle60

I have a question I am looking to Order the Z390 I Strix with the RTX 2080Ti Strix and the Asus Ryuo CPU cooler 240mm aio.

I am worried about the Asus software and it not working right so I can change my color scheme should I worry my software won't work with the above items


----------



## Jpmboy

TMatzelle60 said:


> I have a question I am looking to Order the Z390 I Strix with the RTX 2080Ti Strix and the Asus Ryuo CPU cooler 240mm aio.
> 
> I am worried about the Asus software and it not working right so I can change my color scheme should I worry my software won't work with the above items


Aura will work with that hardware, no problem. :thumb:


----------



## nezff

havent overclocked my system, but just wondering if these settings were ok?

i5 9600k, Asus prime z390a motherboard, Corsair H100i plat cooler, 16gb Corsair ram

Turned Asus MCE disabled
CPU core ratio to "sync all cores" Cores were only hitting 4.3 under load. syncing them they are now at boost 4.6 across all cores
CPU voltage to adaptive. Here is what Im getting in cpuz. Under gaming load (BFV) im getting voltage of 1.208-1.217


----------



## Ziver

I have a very odd problem ! Maybe you can help me . I can manage to get 5.1Ghz stable With 1.32v and temps are not going above 82c. But this is before change my rams :/ When im using Corsair 32GB 8x4 3200Mhz RGB Pro , everything good and stable with 5.1Ghz. But after change my rams to 8x4 Corsair Dominator RGB 3200mhz, i cant get stable at 5.1ghz. I tried diffrent vccsa and vcsıo voltage nothing change. But when try 2 stick again i can get 5.1GHz stable but tried 4 stick again i cant do 5.1ghz. Now i can do 1.288v 5.0ghz without problem.

Why i cant do it with 4 stick Dominator ? 

9700K
Asus Maximus Hero Wifi Z390
Corsair H150i Pro


----------



## Jpmboy

Ziver said:


> I have a very odd problem ! Maybe you can help me . I can manage to get 5.1Ghz stable With 1.32v and temps are not going above 82c. But this is before change my rams :/ When im using Corsair 32GB 8x4 3200Mhz RGB Pro , everything good and stable with 5.1Ghz. But after change my rams to 8x4 Corsair Dominator RGB 3200mhz, i cant get stable at 5.1ghz. I tried diffrent vccsa and vcsıo voltage nothing change. But when try 2 stick again i can get 5.1GHz stable but tried 4 stick again i cant do 5.1ghz. Now i can do 1.288v 5.0ghz without problem.
> 
> Why i cant do it with 4 stick Dominator ?
> 
> 9700K
> Asus Maximus Hero Wifi Z390
> Corsair H150i Pro


the only difference in that ram swap is "Pro"? Did you try lowering the cache multiplier with the new sticks with the core at 5.1 (and the previously good 5.1 vcore)? Cache draws from vcore and it's affected by differences in ram ICs.


----------



## DarthFK

HELP!!!!!! My ASUS Z390-E refuses to cooperate with my 8700k. Each work in different combos, but not together! 

The BIOS is latest. EDIT - No bent pins!

So, I recently purchased a combo of an i5-9400f & ASUS z390-e over ebay (open box). The plan was to "upgrade" the CPU to a delidded 8700k I had running in my son's machine. But now I have encountered problems, perhaps Motherboard, perhaps CPU related, I can't understand this weird behavior:

I tested the z390-E with the i5-9400f and two sticks of G.Skill TridentZ RGB 3600c17 upon purchase, several weeks ago. All 4 RAM slots were tested (one pair then another pair), all went fine.

Just yesterday I tested the same 8700k on another solid board for my another build (Mobo GB z390AorusUltra) and it worked fine with the same kit. All 4 ram slots were tested, in dual channel mode again, and no problems.

Today:

1. I cleared CMOS, placed the 8700k into ASUS z390-E and RAM into recommended slots A2-B2 - orange RAM led turns solid, no post. 

(Every time I cleared CMOS again after each RAM slots change that followed)

2. Tried one stick in RAM slot A2 as per ASUS single channel placement (mobo manual) - orange led on, no post.

3. Tried two sticks of RAM in A1-B1 - orange led on, no post.

4. Tried only one stick of RAM in A1 - orange led on, no post.

5. Tried only one stick in B2 - all fine, went into post & UEFI(!)

6. Tried only one stick in B1 - all fine, 
went into post & UEFI.

7. Tried two sticks in B1-B2 - all fine, well, single channel - went into post & UEFI (yes, I then loaded optimized defaults)

8. Without clearing CMOS immediately tried ASUS recommended A2-B2 two sticks - no joy /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif

9. Cleared CMOS, tried A2-B2 again. Orange led, no post again.

9b. Took out 8700k, installed the 9400f and everything's fine, RAM works, PC boots into UEFI & Windows.

10. Installed the 8700k into Z390 Aorus with the same RAM kit in slots A1-B1 and it works fine, 

11. installed the 8700k back into ASUS and no, it refuses to post!!! 

This was written between all these attempts. Latest Asus z390-e Bios. The socket is clean. Argh!

- If 8700k works with the same RAM, in dual channel, on a z390 Aorus Ultra, 

- and ASUS works fine with this RAM and 9400f, 

- why on Earth doesn't ASUS Z390-E works with the 8700k and this RAM???!!! 

P.S. And I did used a different RAM kit (ADATA XPG 3000C16) and still the same problem.

P.P.S. My PSU is EVGA 850P2 and I changed two cables on two different connectors to the CPU power socket, just to make sure. Still, this is the same PSU that works fine with 8700k & z390 Aorus.


----------



## Jpmboy

check the z390-e for bent socket pins.


----------



## DarthFK

Jpmboy said:


> check the z390-e for bent socket pins.


Yeah, first thing checked. No bent pins. And i5-9400F works, but i7-8700k doesn't.


----------



## DarthFK

If this is the "official" Asus support thread, is there an @asus rep to answer my question, please?


----------



## Jpmboy

Yup, it is. NO ASUS tech support here (lately). It seems like you got a bad/bugged board off ebay... that would piss me off too.



"9b" in your description, I'll assume that the 3600c17 sticks worked in any of the (2) dual channel configurations with the 9400f? If yes, clean the bottom of the 8700K with alcohol, remount it and be sure to not overtighten the cooling block. The giga board uses a serial ram layout (afaik), and the ASUS 4 slot board uses T-topology... which seems more sensitive to over or uneven tightening around the socket. You could try flashing back to an earlier bios version - the first supporting CFL. Since your board is second hand, well you could try an ASUS support ticket if you think that will help. Or try the ROG Channel on Discord. :thumb:


----------



## DarthFK

Thanks Jpmboy for your reply! Understood about ASUS. Too many complaints, I guess.

Well, yes, the Asus z390-E did work with the same RAM in both channels (a2b2/a1b1), with the 9400f hooked up. But I also did wipe the 8700k before installing it. I always clean and inspect any CPU before installing them. So that wasn't the issue.

Very good point on T-topology - I didn't know that. But I've read previously that coolers might do that in some cases, and also initially thought that me overtightening the Be Quet DRP3 might have been a reason for this weird behaviour. I did use a stock intel cooler after that (and before reporting here) just to be sure. Still no joy. So, the cooler/overtightening doesn't seem to have been the reason.

I will, however, try a 9700k in that z390-E and see how it reacts. 

After that I'll think about rechecking the RAM with the 9400f and flashing an older CF launch BIOS for a try. Wanted to do that this evening, but just ended my thermal paste yesterday and got an IC diamond 24 (what a mess of a paste, stained my 9400F badly). So today, instead of retesting, had to get to BestBuy and buy some basic Thermaltake TG7 paste till a new Noctua paste gets in. I'll try to see if I can test today - even if Asus is not on this thread, I'll report today or tomorrow, to keep you posted and anyone who might have a similar issue aware.

Thank you for your help and ideas!


----------



## DarthFK

Well, I tried the 9700k with the RAM in A2B2 and had the same issue as with the 8700k - no post and the boot stops before post, at orange led RAM lights.

I then tried 1 RAM stick in B2 and it was again ok. Then I downloaded and tried to downgrade the BIOS via UEFI Ez-Flash utility and it didn't allow me to. So, I used the AMI Flash Utility (USB/DOS) and I got it successfully downgraded and then upon restart it cannot pass the RAM in any slot (apparently is bricked). 

Now it shows orange light upon checking, with any stick in any RAM slot and the CrashFree utility does not start (or I am doing something wrong?). It's 6am in the morning and I haven't slept a bit, trying to troubleshoot it, need some sleep. But... Help!


----------



## DarthFK

Well:

1. The 8700k went into the "old" AsRock z370 Taichi with an identical RAM kit (TridentZ 3600c17) and works in dual channel on A2B2 slots [email protected] The thing with this specific Asrock us that it had bent pins limiting A1B1 to stock RAM speed, hence my search for another two boards. Anyway, obviously the 8700k & RAM work on AsRock (T-Topology?). Hence it is definitely the Asus z390-E at fault.

2. The Asus z390-E (that showed successfull AMI [dos/usb] utity flash for one step BIOS downgrade, but then refused to boot in any RAM config with the 9700k) - it doesn't even want to go into Asus Crashfree Bios, a feature it presumably has (fat32 formatted USB, bios name changed to z390e.cap). Any ideas if it's at all possible to force the Crashfree to work? Or I am left with eeprom flashing option only (never tried that)?

I feel like I am going deeper into the rabbit's hole every step I take with this board 😤🤯


----------



## Iridium31

I noticed a bizarre issue while fiddling with overclocking and was hoping to find a solution. The components relevant to my question are the i7 8700k and Asus Z390-I motherboard on the latest 2417 bios revision. Getting to the point, monitoring via HWinfo64 shows the RING: VR Voltage Max, ICCmax, PL4 flag being set as true when applying an AVX offset of 2. Incidentally, I am experiencing core/cache frequency throttling. I have confirmed this AVX setting is what is causing my problem. My confusion is why it is causing this problem. If I apply a -1 offset the system behaves as expected. As soon as I go to a -2 offset the undesirable behavior occurs. I have taken the following troubleshooting steps to fix the problem to no avail.

1. Reset to defaults and apply desired settings over again from scratch.
2. Disable XMP, reboot, check results.
3. Steadily increment desired core voltage (the setting description says avx offsets may require higher core voltages).
3. Max out any and all current/power limits in bios.
4. Tried all three MCE settings of auto, disabled and enabled (I "think" this adjusts the #3 values, but am not certain).
5. Manually defined cache ratios (this works with a manual OC if both values are set to the same ratio, it does not seem to work under adaptive). 
6. Adjustments to LLC settings using values between 4-6.

At this point I am at a loss. I'm wondering if some type of glitch/bug is afoot.

As an edit to my own post.... I think I figured out what is happening. It would appear if the AVX offset pushes the frequency below the default, stock turbo boost frequency the board thinks a power/current limit is being breached. The 8700k defaults to a 4.7 ghz max turbo boost frequency. I was running an OC at 4.8 ghz with a -2 AVX offset, thereby dropping it to 4.6 ghz when running anything with AVX (below 4.7 ghz). I then tested the idea with a 4.9 ghz OC with -3 AVX offset, and 5 ghz OC with -4 AVX offset. From there I tested even lower AVX offsets for the 4.8-5.0 ghz range. Sure enough, anytime the offset pushes the processor below that 4.7 stock turbo boost frequency the HWinfo error was active and the core/cache frequencies would throttle. 

It does not appear to matter whether you adjust power/current limits, voltages, whatever. With manual mode defining the max/min cache ratios appears to fix the problem. With adaptive nothing appears to work. I'm curious about the reason behind this but, meh, another time perhaps. I edited my post in case someone else has a similar problem.


----------



## Jpmboy

DarthFK said:


> Well:
> 
> 1. The 8700k went into the "old" AsRock z370 Taichi with an identical RAM kit (TridentZ 3600c17) and works in dual channel on A2B2 slots [email protected] The thing with this specific Asrock us that it had bent pins limiting A1B1 to stock RAM speed, hence my search for another two boards. Anyway, obviously the 8700k & RAM work on AsRock (T-Topology?). Hence it is definitely the Asus z390-E at fault.
> 
> 2. The Asus z390-E (that showed successfull AMI [dos/usb] utity flash for one step BIOS downgrade, but then refused to boot in any RAM config with the 9700k) - it doesn't even want to go into Asus Crashfree Bios, a feature it presumably has (fat32 formatted USB, bios name changed to z390e.cap). Any ideas if it's at all possible to force the Crashfree to work? Or I am left with eeprom flashing option only (never tried that)?
> 
> I feel like I am going deeper into the rabbit's hole every step I take with this board 😤🤯



bios recovery should work. Be sure to use a USB 2.0 stick in a 2.0 slot. You can also load the bios on to a SATA HDD and run crash-free recovery from that. Do not connect any other storage devices. I can/will also work from the OEM DVD/USB stick provided with the board and a SATA DVD reader as the only connected storage device. I'm not sure if it will work with a USB DVD drive. Any ROG board can be flashed without a cpu in the socket and only the ATX power connector in using flash-back...
but even after all that working, the symptoms certainly look to be a bad board off e-bay. NOT an uncommon occurrence.


----------



## DarthFK

Jpmboy said:


> DarthFK said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well:
> 
> 1. The 8700k went into the "old" AsRock z370 Taichi with an identical RAM kit (TridentZ 3600c17) and works in dual channel on A2B2 slots [email protected] The thing with this specific Asrock us that it had bent pins limiting A1B1 to stock RAM speed, hence my search for another two boards. Anyway, obviously the 8700k & RAM work on AsRock (T-Topology?). Hence it is definitely the Asus z390-E at fault.
> 
> 2. The Asus z390-E (that showed successfull AMI [dos/usb] utity flash for one step BIOS downgrade, but then refused to boot in any RAM config with the 9700k) - it doesn't even want to go into Asus Crashfree Bios, a feature it presumably has (fat32 formatted USB, bios name changed to z390e.cap). Any ideas if it's at all possible to force the Crashfree to work? Or I am left with eeprom flashing option only (never tried that)?
> 
> I feel like I am going deeper into the rabbit's hole every step I take with this board 😤🤯
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bios recovery should work. Be sure to use a USB 2.0 stick in a 2.0 slot. You can also load the bios on to a SATA HDD and run crash-free recovery from that. Do not connect any other storage devices. I can/will also work from the OEM DVD/USB stick provided with the board and a SATA DVD reader as the only connected storage device. I'm not sure if it will work with a USB DVD drive. Any ROG board can be flashed without a cpu in the socket and only the ATX power connector in using flash-back...
> but even after all that working, the symptoms certainly look to be a bad board off e-bay. NOT an uncommon occurrence. /forum/images/smilies/redface.gif
Click to expand...

Thanks Jpmboy, but "it should" and "it does" are not the same for Asus, apparently. I connected a fat32 usb2 to a USB2 header without result. 

I even had the same idea about the DVD, pulled out of storage a tested SATA DVD writer, disconnected the HDD and any USB, and inserted the DVD that came with the board and... nothing.

This board, being a Strix, didn't have the flashback button on the back as more expensive ROG boards do, so the only way to do a reflash was via Crashfree Bios3 feature, which didn't want to start.

About eBay, it depends, but definitely there is no (or rare) warranty on the items bought there. From my experience, and I bought over 10-12 boards over time on eBay, this is the 1stboard that looked ok, but had issues. In other cases I did have scammers, not showing or showing inadequately the socket on the picture and they had bent pins - a waste of time, of course, but not that often. Ultimately, one can get a new fluke in store/online, but, yeah, it will have warranty.

Anyway, I contacted ASUS and the board was on warranty, so they advised me to RMA. It was sent and arrived at their facility today. Now I am wondering what will this adventure turn into - what will they say about that board I bought from another person (or ask $ for it.) 🤔


----------



## Jpmboy

DarthFK said:


> Thanks Jpmboy, but "it should" and "it does" are not the same for Asus, apparently. I connected a fat32 usb2 to a USB2 header without result.
> 
> I even had the same idea about the DVD, pulled out of storage a tested SATA DVD writer, disconnected the HDD and any USB, and inserted the DVD that came with the board and... nothing.
> 
> This board, being a Strix, didn't have the flashback button on the back as more expensive ROG boards do, so the only way to do a reflash was via Crashfree Bios3 feature, which didn't want to start.
> 
> About eBay, it depends, but definitely there is no (or rare) warranty on the items bought there. From my experience, and I bought over 10-12 boards over time on eBay, this is the 1stboard that looked ok, but had issues. In other cases I did have scammers, not showing or showing inadequately the socket on the picture and they had bent pins - a waste of time, of course, but not that often. Ultimately, one can get a new fluke in store/online, but, yeah, it will have warranty.
> 
> Anyway, I contacted ASUS and the board was on warranty, so they advised me to RMA. It was sent and arrived at their facility today. Now I am wondering what will this adventure turn into - what will they say about that board I bought from another person (or ask $ for it.) 🤔


Nah, they should just reflash the board (easy) and then the issue becomes whether or not it's got a bad ram channel... post back with what they find. :thumb:


----------



## smilinjohn

So I've read a comment or two about difficulty with the Asus RMA process, how true is this? 



I recently had the A1/B1 Ram sockets stop working on my Strix Z390-H board, and my RGB header stopped working right. I had hoped I got the new water block to tight (shouldn't have affected the RGB header though) but resetting the water block three times didn't help and I didn't see any bent pins in the socket. I've cleared the RTC Ram and CMOS several times.



I guess I need to look at the CPU pins under a magnifying glass but it'll be this weekend at the earliest before I can really break this rig down again and look into it. I couldn't look at the possibility of having to RMA this board because it is my main rig and I need it for school, it does work with ram in A2/B2. 



I ordered a new Maximus XI Hero this week and it was delivered yesterday so looks like I'm in for a rebuild this weekend.


----------



## DarthFK

smilinjohn said:


> So I've read a comment or two about difficulty with the Asus RMA process, how true is this?
> 
> 
> 
> I recently had the A1/B1 Ram sockets stop working on my Strix Z390-H board, and my RGB header stopped working right. I had hoped I got the new water block to tight (shouldn't have affected the RGB header though) but resetting the water block three times didn't help and I didn't see any bent pins in the socket. I've cleared the RTC Ram and CMOS several times.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I need to look at the CPU pins under a magnifying glass but it'll be this weekend at the earliest before I can really break this rig down again and look into it. I couldn't look at the possibility of having to RMA this board because it is my main rig and I need it for school, it does work with ram in A2/B2.
> 
> 
> 
> I ordered a new Maximus XI Hero this week and it was delivered yesterday so looks like I'm in for a rebuild this weekend.


Jpmboy - yep, eeprom was my thinking, I even wanted to do it myself, but then decided to check with ASUS why my RAM was acting. For now it's in testing/repair (unknown if it's the 1st or the 2nd). I'll report as soon as I have something.

smilinjohn - in this z390 gen, I would've rather ordered an Aorus Ultra or Master Maximus reduced it's VRM to a 4x2 design this gen, while Gigabyte has a super solid 6x2. Take a looksee at Buildzoid on GN about the z390 boards. I actually have an Ultra I got from Microcenter on clearance (open box) tested and waiting to go into either mine or my son's rig, after z390-e comes back from RMA.

As to this and previous RMA process it varies and it can definitely be very long:
- I previously only RMAd a GPU to ASUS, got back a used replacement that was crashing/BSODing my system, even after a Windows clean install. Called them back, they attempted to troubleshoot, then attempted to suggest to overclock my GPU as a solution (!!!), LoL. Then I went upset & they just said they will send another, after I return the 2nd. They finally sent me what looked a brand new one.

With this motherboard, they attempted troubleshooting over chat... but then, after I explained what I already tried, sent a link to RMA. My advice is to check everything before talking to them/be ready in advance. See below the longer version of that:

Business hours:
- ASUS phone hours are limited to working hours. Not very convenient. This time I sent an email, but then decided to chat and to my surprise the chat was available on Sunday at 6pm, which is not their call hours (weekend)

Wait time:
- you have to wait for your turn on chat. I was #4 and it took them. I stepped away from the PC and... lost my turn. I just reconnected, was #2 and got into chat.

They will try troubleshooting over chat:
- they attempted to get me troubleshoot over chat. At one point they even suggested that I take the motherboard out and do a bench test (mine was on the bench - that saved me from days of troubleshooting with them, apparently). As you may imagine troubleshoot over chat/email would normally last for a good while. I had to explain that I checked everything, gave them details. At that point they checked my board serial and suggested RMA. They checked if the board was still under warranty and it was. There was no need for proof of purchase.

Instructions:
- then the sent instructions with a link to RMA process over chat. Those are relatively clear, there are only two options, board info & one field for the description of the problem. Email followed up with the same instructions.

Shipping:
- It's on you. Either your shipping or you buy a lable from them, but you must secure (wrap) the board properly. I went with my shipping via USPS 2-3b.days delivery. I've sent it in its double boxed - mobo with bubble wrap under&over the protective anti-static bag, inside of its box, then mobo box was placed inside of an USPS flat rate middle box. I decided to pay insurance covering $200, that was a $3-4 extra. Asus offers a $15 label, without saying what that covers or carrier.

Follow up:
- As I suggested, then I got the email reply. I am now doing the follow up over email. Every time you reply they write back and also issue a new ticket number, which was confusing. I asked them about it and new ticket numbers are a part of an automated process for each reply, but they follow the same thread. So, the ticket number doesn't matter. What matters is the RMA number that you would get when registering for RMA.

Results:
I'll report later


----------



## smilinjohn

DarthFK said:


> smilinjohn - in this z390 gen, I would've rather ordered an Aorus Ultra or Master/forum/images/smilies/wink.gif Maximus reduced it's PWM to a 4x2 design this gen, while Gigabyte has a super solid 6x2. Take a looksee at Buildzoid on GN about the z390 boards. I actually have an Ultra I got from Microcenter on clearance (open box) tested and waiting to go into either mine or my son's rig, after z390-e comes back from RMA.



I've had good experiences with Asus in the past, the Maximus is my 3rd board from them. I'm not overclocking or doing anything crazy with my rig, though I do water cool. I just like for it to work, work well, and I have an aversion to cheap parts so off-brand boards and/or lower-tier boards make my sensibilities itch.


I have an ASRock B365 Phantom Gaming 4 MB that I paid $100 on NewEgg still sitting in its box that still hasn't been cut from its packaging. That board is an exchange, the first one burnt the PCIE_1 socket when I plugged in my 1080Ti, I had a lower end GPU that I got from a friend that worked fine in that socket. Before that, I wasn't happy with the quality (missing mount holes and the SATA layout was wonky, and there was a cap that sits to close to the CPU socket so WC would be a challenge with my blocks) and then didn't care for the BIOS when I powered it up. It ran fine until I put my GPU in but given the issue from out of the gate I went back to Asus. So when I got the replacement back I decided it would make a good basic board to build a computer on for my nephew this Christmas. 




DarthFK said:


> As to this and previous RMA process it varies and it can definitely be very long:



Well with having another board on deck ready to go how long it takes isn't an issue for me. I was wanting a new board with a few more bells and whistles (more RGB headers, and this board should deffinatlly still be under warentie since I just bought it in Febuary or so.




DarthFK said:


> My advice is to check everything before talking to them/be ready in advance.



I usually do/am, CS drives me up the wall trying to walk me through steps I have already taken numerous times. But I guess I can set it up on the bench and have it ready to power up when I do call. Thanks for the suggestion.




DarthFK said:


> Business hours:
> - ASUS phone hours are limited to working hours. Not very convenient. This time I sent an email, but then decided to chat and to my surprise the chat was available on Sunday at 6pm, which is not their call hours (weekend)



Calling during business hours ATM isn't an issue. I lost my job of 5+ years a couple of months ago and have decided that this semester I'm going to be a full-time student (been in school a couple of years now) and take the few difficult classes I need.




DarthFK said:


> Wait time:
> - you have to wait for your turn on chat. I was #4 and it took them. I stepped away from the PC and... lost my turn. I just reconnected, was #2 and got into chat.
> 
> They will try troubleshooting over chat🙄:
> - they attempted to get me troubleshoot over chat. At one point they even suggested that I take the motherboard out and do a bench test (mine was on the bench - that saved me from days of troubleshooting with them, apparently). As you may imagine troubleshoot over chat/email would normally last for a good while. I had to explain that I checked everything, gave them details. At that point they checked my board serial and suggested RMA. They checked if the board was still under warranty and it was. There was no need for proof of purchase.



I'm not a support by chat kind of guy, I think an actual phone call is going to be less consuming of time, while I am unemployed I do still do stuff for my land-lord to help with the rent and I work on computers and phones for the college kids.




DarthFK said:


> Instructions:
> - then the sent instructions with a link to RMA process over chat. Those are relatively clear, there are only two options, board info & one field for the description of the problem. Email followed up with the same instructions.



The couple of things I have had to RMA that was how it was, the one board I mentioned earlier and a NutGear switch...




DarthFK said:


> Shipping:
> - It's on you. Either your shipping or you buy a lable from them, but you must secure (wrap) the board properly. I went with my shipping via USPS 2-3b.days delivery. I've sent it in its double boxed - mobo with bubble wrap under&over the protective anti-static bag, inside of its box, then mobo box was placed inside of an USPS flat rate middle box. I decided to pay insurance covering $200, that was a $3-4 extra. Asus offers a $15 label, without saying what that covers or carrier.



I figured since I've had the board for several months now. If you don't mind me asking what did the shipping run through the USPS?




DarthFK said:


> Follow up:
> - As I suggested, then I got the email reply. I am now doing the follow up over email. Every time you reply they write back and also issue a new ticket number, which was confusing. I asked them about it and new ticket numbers are a part of an automated process for each reply, but they follow the same thread. So, the ticket number doesn't matter. What matters is the RMA number that you would get when registering for RMA.



At lest they communicate.


----------



## DarthFK

Well, sad fo hear about "free time" in a way. Though actually I do understand. After a very long and serious career I do an RA now myself, at a college, basically for free, as a temporary "pitstop" measure and a jump board... Never did my PhD and now I am considering it after so many years. Good luck to you as well!

As to other board makers - I had several AsRock boards, from z77 Extreme4 & 6 to z370Taichi. I'd swear by AsRock. In your case might've been a fluke, who knows. Current Giga z390 are reported to be quality, unlike z370 or earlier (well, my dad still holds my Giga p35 board of old times, that was an excellent quality board, but they jumped up and down in this respect. Yet, their z390 boards are superb, but the do(!) have an outdated looking UEFI). So, yes, if you don't OC and feel more comfortable with, I must admit, excellent ASUS UEFI, then ASUS it is. And you have it already, so, this is it.

USPS shipping - priority mail medium flat rate box (side loading) pricing at the post office $14.35 + insurance (covering $200) is $3.50 = $18.35. Don't remember if I paid tax on it. The motherboard was sent on Monday from NY and arrived to Asus (don't remember where exactly 😂 oh boy, am I having memory issues or what) on Wednesday.


----------



## smilinjohn

DarthFK said:


> Well, sad fo hear about "free time" in a way. Though actually I do understand. After a very long and serious career I do an RA now myself, at a college, basically for free, as a temporary "pitstop" measure and a jump board... Never did my PhD and now I am considering it after so many years. Good luck to you as well!



Well, they did me a favor letting me go, I'm glad it happened.




DarthFK said:


> USPS shipping - priority mail medium flat rate box (side loading) pricing at the post office $14.35 + insurance (covering $200) is $3.50 = $18.35. Don't remember if I paid tax on it. The motherboard was sent on Monday from NY and arrived to Asus (don't remember where exactly 😂 oh boy, am I having memory issues or what) on Wednesday.



I think they're in California?


----------



## DarthFK

smilinjohn said:


> Well, they did me a favor letting me go, I'm glad it happened.
> ---
> I think they're in California?


Found my tracking, this center isn't so far away in my case - JEFFERSONVILLE, IN 47130


----------



## smilinjohn

DarthFK said:


> Found my tracking, this center isn't so far away in my case - JEFFERSONVILLE, IN 47130



Really, I grew up just across the river from there in Louisville, KY. I'm about 2 hours east of there now.


----------



## smilinjohn

Got the new Maximus XI Hero up and running, no issues so far. All the ram slots are working and all looks good. 



But I think I found out what happened to the RGB header on the Strix board, when I moved my 1080Ti the wire for the RGB LEDs on the water block of the card were sitting on top of the SATA ports, when I pulled the GPU back out of the socket and looked at the wire it had been smashed, wiggled it a little bit and it fell right off. So I guess there was a short at that wire...


Now hopefully I just had the water block to tight on the Strix board and all those RAM slots still work. There were no bent pins in the socket that I could see under a magnifying glass, so fingers crossed that all is good and it can become my backup board.


----------



## Jpmboy

smilinjohn said:


> Got the new Maximus XI Hero up and running, no issues so far. All the ram slots are working and all looks good.
> 
> 
> 
> *But I think I found out what happened to the RGB header on the Strix board, when I moved my 1080Ti the wire for the RGB LEDs on the water block of the card were sitting on top of the SATA ports, when I pulled the GPU back out of the socket and looked at the wire it had been smashed, wiggled it a little bit and it fell right off. So I guess there was a short at that wire...
> *
> 
> Now hopefully I just had the water block to tight on the Strix board and all those RAM slots still work. There were no bent pins in the socket that I could see under a magnifying glass, so fingers crossed that all is good and it can become my backup board.



this is a common cause of the RGB failure. The wiring is very fragile!


----------



## smilinjohn

Jpmboy said:


> this is a common cause of the RGB failure. The wiring is very fragile!



Yea it's a bummer too when I have guest over and they start looking at the PC I like to turn the lights on for them the kids REALLY like it when I can do that, otherwise, I leave the GPU and CPU blocks off. If Asus would go back to single row SATS ports I wouldn't have this problem...


----------



## DarthFK

Update on ASUS RMA and actually on support:
1. The z390-E that I reported about is still in repair till tomorrow at least, but the support is where there are weird issues.

2. Several different support people are following up with me, via a single email thread that I started with them. However, now and then I get an email or phone call from other support reps, trying to troubleshoot the RAM issue. I feel like "what the..." When I tell them the board was RMA'd they get baffled. One called me with the same idea to "help me with my RAM issue - please use the latest BIOS" Baffled by me when I told him BIOS update went sour and the board was RMAed, but then(!!!) he called on his own initiative the repair techs, according to him, and they told him that the motherboard was repaired and RAM slots tested too, as per my request, and everything is fine. I am all wow, except, when I wrote this to my email thread with web support from Asus to update them about their colleague phone call, they denied it. When I asked them if they could check with techs, they said they couldn't reach them, but the system shows them that the MB is still under repair. Then they asked me what do I want to learn from the techs?! You might believe that the email/web support thread people were bad, but actually they were the most consistent with appropriate and most accurate information. But I was really pissed - asked them no more conflicting calls, the only ASUS info should come only through the email thread and only if there is something to report. 

That type of experience. Will update you guys later.


----------



## DarthFK

UPDATE 2: 
What do you know?! I've sent that Asus Z390-E motherboard (that I bought for $140 in a combo) with no physical damage, no bent pins, but with a BIOS corruption reflash issue. All was clear, reflash, test RAM to see if it was the BIOS, send it back.

Good news on September 3rd - I was called by an ASUS rep to follow up on a previous conversation with me. He then called(!) the techs repairing my mobo and my motherboard was repaired, working and RAM slots were tested, as I requested. So the MB worked with no problems again. The web team couldn't confirm that, but didn't talk to tech repair, as you know.

Asus disaster followed - today they claimed I should pay $175 for physical damage or warranty, to fix the board, without specifying anything. The Asus rep checked the warranty before I sent it, so probably they are attempting to claim damage. I asked them what specific damage they mean, if it had no bent pins and no other damage when it was sent it?! I do know what I am talking about.

On September 3rd it was repaired, tested and working and on September 6th the board without any previous damage suddenly had a damage amounting to more than an Open Box ASUS z390-E at nearby Microcenter??? I build computers since Pentium4 and... ASUS is trying to scam me with that?

You asked me about Asus support - that cannot be called "support". I've sent them the phone call recording of Asus rep telling me that he checked on September 3rd with the techs and it was repaired, working and RAM tested and asked what happened with my mobo in ASUS possession between September 3rd and 6th.

Where do you think I should prep an address against them - Better Business or local buyer protection office in my eBay purchase circumstances, if they refuse to honor their obligation? I'll make time for it and "advertise"


----------



## smilinjohn

DarthFK said:


> Update on ASUS RMA and actually on support:
> 1. The z390-E that I reported about is still in repair till tomorrow at least, but the support is where there are weird issues.



I called so for mine, it has been frustrating as is usual when I have to deal with CSRs whos first language isn't English. It leads to too many conflicts in communication. I spelled out my last name to the first CSR (6 letters) she didn't just misspell it slightly but was COMPLETELY wrong (with 9 letters), my last name begins with a B, what she had begun with an S, and I even spelled it out saying "B as in boy", B & S aren't even close to each other on an Americal layout keyboard, I don't know what country she was in so I don't know what keyboard layout she was using. And she was obviously not familiar at all with what an MB is, let alone how it functions. Plus she reads, line for line, the RMA process instructions, even telling me to send in power cords? I was tinkering around when she went into this process getting the board ready to ship and was like wait, WHAT? You want me to send what cables???



I had to call back that night and get the name straightened out, get up the next day and decide screw it, I'll just buy their shipping label, put the info into their label generator and it populates my part AND name with the wrong last name???


Called AGAIN to address this issue and they had to close the original RMA and start a new RMA to get my name right on EVERYTHING. At first, the guy (now 3rd CSR) was like you can just send it in like that, and I told him in no uncertain terms that I refused to send that board out unless EVERYTHING was correct from the start. I even had him reverify the S/N of the board before the call ended. Bonus though because I complained about having to have 3 calls to just get my board out the door they provided me the shipping label, so there's that.




DarthFK said:


> 2. Several different support people are following up with me, via a single email thread that I started with them. However, now and then I get an email or phone call from other support reps, trying to troubleshoot the RAM issue. I feel like "what the..." When I tell them the board was RMA'd they get baffled. One called me with the same idea to "help me with my RAM issue - please use the latest BIOS" Baffled by me when I told him BIOS update went sour and the board was RMAed, but then(!!!) he called on his own initiative the repair techs, according to him, and they told him that the motherboard was repaired and RAM slots tested too, as per my request, and everything is fine. I am all wow, except, when I wrote this to my email thread with web support from Asus to update them about their colleague phone call, they denied it. When I asked them if they could check with techs, they said they couldn't reach them, but the system shows them that the MB is still under repair. Then they asked me what do I want to learn from the techs?! You might believe that the email/web support thread people were bad, but actually they were the most consistent with appropriate and most accurate information. But I was really pissed - asked them no more conflicting calls, the only ASUS info should come only through the email thread and only if there is something to report.
> 
> That type of experience. Will update you guys later.



I've had a couple of "followup" calls from them myself, which I don't answer anyway because I don't recognize the number and have no reason to be receiving calls from California.




DarthFK said:


> UPDATE 2:
> 
> Asus disaster followed - today they claimed I should pay $175 for physical damage or warranty, to fix the board, without specifying anything. The Asus rep checked the warranty before I sent it, so probably they are attempting to claim damage. I asked them what specific damage they mean, if it had no bent pins and no other damage when it was sent it?! I do know what I am talking about.



This worries me, mine was fine as well, no damage, no bent pins, if there had been I wouldn't have sent it in. I see no point in paying more to repair something (anything) than it cost me just to replace it.





DarthFK said:


> On September 3rd it was repaired, tested and working and on September 6th the board without any previous damage suddenly had a damage amounting to more than an Open Box ASUS z390-E at nearby Microcenter??? I build computers since Pentium4 and... ASUS is trying to scam me with that?



Man, I wish I had an MC near me, would probably get myself in a lot of trouble if I did.





DarthFK said:


> You asked me about Asus support - that cannot be called "support". I've sent them the phone call recording of Asus rep telling me that he checked on September 3rd with the techs and it was repaired, working and RAM tested and asked what happened with my mobo in ASUS possession between September 3rd and 6th.



Well, their call center definitely isn't staffed by people who have even a basic knowledge of the products they are addressing. Any 4th grader can read the script from a screen, knowing IF what they are about to read applies to the problem they are currently dealing with takes just a little bit of understanding.


The problem is outsourcing. And I'm not trying to make this political, it isn't, language barriers are real. That and staffing the call center with people who don't have even basic knowledge of what they are dealing with. I explained what I had done in regards to the issue I was having to the first CSR and it overwhelmed her. She didn't know what I was talking about when I said RAM slot because it wasn't on her screen, I had to say DIMM A_1, DIMM A_2, because when I said "DIMM slot" it still confused her, granted DIMM A_1/A_2 is the correct terminology, but anyone who has a basic understanding of computer building would know what your talking about. 


Reading your experience makes me believe that the CS is outsourced to a third party under contract. My guess is that they get bonuses based on revenues they generate.





DarthFK said:


> Where do you think I should prep an address against them - Better Business or local buyer protection office in my eBay purchase circumstances, if they refuse to honor their obligation? I'll make time for it and "advertise"



I wouldn't know where to tell you to begin. The BBB isn't really all that reliable of a source for Company reviews and if Asus isn't a member of the BBB they can't do anything at all, and eBay I know nothing about as I don't use them.


----------



## DarthFK

Thanks @smilinjohn

Well, Marvin guy calling me was English speaking, natively, though not from US, Canada or UK. I live in NY, I am not a native speaker of English either, probably more than half a city isn't. It's really a melting pot, even in our building. But I am super fluent, now less than before (weird, but my work with Brits influenced my accent to the point it's neither US or British, it's what we call Eurospeak kinda, sounds slightly weird even to me. When I lived outside US my American colleagues were dragging me to their boss to show proper US English from a guy, who never been or studied in US, me that is. Well, I can smell a native speaker in several languages from a mile and can convey, slowly, the info, so that they get it.

And Marvin knew what RAM slots are, no problem in discussing it with him.

The problem here was not language related, for sure.

What I hope to use is the recording of that call - after several scam attempts (including by contractors working for big US companies, such as BestBuy, for example) I am recording my phone calls. It helped me prove with BB that my TV was delivered to someone else, while they claimed that I signed for it. They even arranged another delivery with zero TV assigned - it sounds weird, but they ordered a redelivery, but did not assigned the TV to it. And they attempted to claim that I signed for the initial, 1st delivery, receipt with literally two circles or Os as "my" signature... I don't have a single O in my name... We have CCTV in the building, my signature is actually verifiable online (another weird thing that I cannot escape, it's just out there - attempted to be misused once by some hackers from HK, hence another reason to be careful, protect the data and record), but the TV delivery tech called me and BB provided conflicting information over the phone, which actually proved the delivery was not done, if it was at all, or at least not to me. All these things, including the recordings helped then. It took them a month to sort it out. And from experience, I can say that most transactions in Europe are pretty much painless, while in US is always some sort of a struggle. I've never thought I would record phone calls, but US business practices (or lack thereof) and an enormous amount of scamming attempts, comparatively, made me do it. It so happened, unplanned, that we live here, in NY, now and need to adapt to local realities, both good and bad.

Well, this Marvin guy from ASUS, who checked with techs, was recorded as well. As companies record phone calls, the client has a mutual right to do so. I use that. I've sent them that recording. Moreover, I've even took (anti-scam) pictures of the no-bent pins socket and sent it to them yesterday. The socket has a perfectly aligned grid, no bent pins. There was no other damage. I checked.

So, the main problem here is neither the English skills, nor previous damage. 

What is interesting is that they called 1st, then inquired internally and found out the info about the status of the repair, then they called back and said that they followed up & actually talked to the tech repair, who told them everything was repaired and functioning. 

Another interesting part was that I asked the Web support to check the RAM, and Marvin on the phone support specifically told me that RAM slots were checked too.

So, it was clearly conveyed to him that all was ok.

Then 3 days later they claimed it's broken.

I am no fan of conspiracy theories, I graduated both tech and social sciences, and I live on verifiable facts/repeatable results that form trends (the body of evidence), including rare(r) starting trends, but I just cannot come to any other conclusion in my case - I think Asus screwed up somewhere and simpmy attempted to earn some money at it, whatever actually happened. What the heck, the client will pay. It's a business after all, they have to get profit (which I would've understood, if it was with damaged pins or other damages & it wasn't). I am a pro-business guy, but not a 
completely wildly running one.

I've done a previous RMA with Asus, as I have mentioned, for a GPU (Amd 390) and they've sent me back a used GPU that was crashing a clean install system with fresh drivers, including AMD. They attempted to tell me that I should overclock my GPU to make it work... I've never heard of such incompetent attempts before, but they tried! When I said that I had a minor mechanical issue with my card, not bios or otherwise related and pressured them seriously, only then they've sent what ultimately seemed to actually be a brand new card. Extremes. Of course they wanted to avoid losing $. That's why they try to shove the client 1st. 

But in this MB z390-E case I took pictures and recorded calls. I am pretty sure that they will try to deny my claim nonetheless. Hence I am thinking about whom I should address, if they try denials.

If anyone else has an idea whom I can complain to in case Asus plays it's game, I'd appreciate that.


----------



## DarthFK

Update 3: I have received an email at 4am EST with a claim that my board had liquid damage, with a photo of the PCB with traces of thermal paste!!! Yes, the non-conductive thermal paste removed with non-conductive isopropyl! 

The sheer incompetence is mind boggling!!! Or the desire to get my money.

I replied that a drop of thermal paste was removed from the PCB with isopropyl alcohol. Both the paste and isopropyl being non-conductive, Asus claim is chemically and technically incorrect. And that they should just flash the BIOS and solve the matter.

Can you imagine???!!! Thermal paste is "liquid damage"???!!! 

If someone saw @der8auer 's video - he, after removing the battery and waiting the electricity to drain, washed his motherboard in the washer... I have graduated electronics initially, years ago. I have once washed a motherboard in an isopropyl bath, after removing cmos & draining the power, and the MB was working as a charm and had a happy long life after. They are trying to gain advantage on the customer's expense, thinking everybody is incompetent.

Asus support writing at 4am means just one thing - contractors from abroad, just forwarding some info they've got. The thermal paste that any of uses every so often, claimed by techs to be liquid damage, is either lazy or incompetence, or shamless money extraction. As you see I do need an advise to whom I should complain.


----------



## smilinjohn

DarthFK said:


> Asus support writing at 4am means just one thing - contractors from abroad, just forwarding some info they've got. The thermal paste that any of uses every so often, claimed by techs to be liquid damage, is either lazy or incompetence, or shamless money extraction. As you see I do need an advise to whom I should complain.



Wow.


----------



## Jpmboy

what a nightmare...


----------



## smilinjohn

Well, I guess I'm getting a replacement board. I just got home and there was an email from support saying my repair had been shipped. The support site didn't say anything about what was wrong, I did notice that the S/N was different, should be here tomorrow.


----------



## DarthFK

smilinjohn said:


> Well, I guess I'm getting a replacement board. I just got home and there was an email from support saying my repair had been shipped. The support site didn't say anything about what was wrong, I did notice that the S/N was different, should be here tomorrow.


Smilinjohn, this is really good news! I am very glad that you didn't have to go through my experience. At least one positive outcome. 👍

My only advice would be - test everything on it, just to be sure.


----------



## mattxx88

Cannot find any info about, i think it will, but i prefer ask to bo sure 

i9 9900KS will be supported by z370 chipset? i want upgrade my 8086k when it will be available (Maximus X Formula)


----------



## DarthFK

mattxx88 said:


> Cannot find any info about, i think it will, but i prefer ask to bo sure /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> i9 9900KS will be supported by z370 chipset? i want upgrade my 8086k when it will be available (Maximus X Formula)


Well, you cannot be sure here, apparently. As others have noted Asus support is "not home" / not on this "official support" thread.

I would actually ask Asus support directly, but since they didn't officially launched the 9900ks, I wouldn't expect them to answer yet. It's worth giving it a try, after all it's just a chat or email.

I would agree with you that you should expect the 9900ks to be theoretically supported by a top end z370, as it's a 9th gen CPU after all despite its higher base and turbo clocks. And Maximus X boards VRM should be able to deliver quite enough of voltage (it's just a higher binned 9900k with 8c/16t, and I think as of 1901 bios or higher 9th gen is supported, at least I ran a couple of days ago my 8c/8t 9700k on a Maximus X Hero), but it's better to ask Asus support directly, you never know 😉


----------



## smilinjohn

DarthFK said:


> Smilinjohn, this is really good news! I am very glad that you didn't have to go through my experience. At least one positive outcome. 👍
> 
> My only advice would be - test everything on it, just to be sure.



Yea I'm not getting too excited until I get a chance to test it, the question is at this point, when will I have the time? Hopefully, this weekend since the math lab at school isn't open.




mattxx88 said:


> Cannot find any info about, i think it will, but i prefer ask to bo sure
> 
> i9 9900KS will be supported by z370 chipset? i want upgrade my 8086k when it will be available (Maximus X Formula)



Theoretically, it should be, if not I'm sure a BIOS revision will follow shortly after release.


----------



## mattxx88

DarthFK said:


> (it's just a higher binned 9900k with 8c/16t


this.
We will see but i think we won't have particular issues



smilinjohn said:


> Theoretically, it should be, if not I'm sure a BIOS revision will follow shortly after release.


thanks, i thought you got more info than me, but i see we are all in the same boat... waiting


----------



## Jpmboy

mattxx88 said:


> Cannot find any info about, i think it will, but i prefer ask to bo sure
> 
> i9 9900KS will be supported by z370 chipset? i want upgrade my 8086k when it will be available (Maximus X Formula)


yes, you just need to flash bios to support that cpu. Check the CPU QVL.


----------



## DarthFK

Update4: Yesterday I got another "pay or else" email from Asus, from payments, who had no clue I was in a dispute. I wrote a really pissed reply and included all 4 email addresses I was getting uncoordinated emails from.

I asked my case to be finally escalated, as I requested before, and do it "now", I reiterated that non-conductive thermal paste cannot conduct electricity, therefore traces of thermal paste are not "liquid damage", and used one of their options of writing a complaint to the CEO (I presume of repairs?).

I reiterated that I already got a call on September 3rd that my board was repaired and they should honor their warranty. 

Today I got this from Level3 support, who intervened after I complained "I would like to inform you that our servicing team have been instructed to resume servicing with charges removed."

But, after September 3rd call, I won't believe it till I see it.


----------



## smilinjohn

Well, just bench tested the replacement board. The M.2_2 slot doesn't recognize my M.2 WD Blue drive, and when I put the drive in the M.2_1 slot the OS hangs and won't load.


I've cleared the CMOS and RTC RAM multiple times, I've tried doing a clean install of W10 Pro 3 times.


The Asus support center is trying to blame my installation media, a USB stick that I've used to install W10 before...


The CSR COMPLETELY missed the M.2_2 slot not working refuses to anything more than escalating the problem to the next tier. 



Not happy with Asus ATM.


----------



## DarthFK

smilinjohn said:


> Well, just bench tested the replacement board. The M.2_2 slot doesn't recognize my M.2 WD Blue drive, and when I put the drive in the M.2_1 slot the OS hangs and won't load.
> 
> 
> I've cleared the CMOS and RTC RAM multiple times, I've tried doing a clean install of W10 Pro 3 times.
> 
> 
> The Asus support center is trying to blame my installation media, a USB stick that I've used to install W10 before...
> 
> 
> The CSR COMPLETELY missed the M.2_2 slot not working refuses to anything more than escalating the problem to the next tier.
> 
> 
> 
> Not happy with Asus ATM.


Tell me about it... But escalating might have helped in my case. They did bring me to the point of dispair though before escalating, but moved on after I hammered their heads. So, maybe there is still hope. Just continue to hammer in that they missed to check the m2.

On another hand, to eliminate any argument on their side and try one final time, I am not sure if you tried the "longer" version, but would you want to attempt the "advanced" board clearing? 

I don't know if you are interested to try and update the BIOS again, but I think you've mentioned that it's a Maximus board. So perhaps you would want to use BIOS reflash method with the BIOS button on the back of the board (no cpu,no ram, no ssd, just PSU's 24pin and 8pin connected to the board and the correct bios with the correct name, placed on USB formatted in fat32 in the designated bios reflash USB slot on the back). I used this week it on a Maximus VIII that was giving me an Error00 with a perfectly good cpu, and it solved some things, followed by a "deeper" clear cmos/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif 

After a successful flash, check the bios. Then remove the PSU cable, then remove CMOS battery, then short the CMOS battery base and side for over 10sec (redundant if you use the next method, but I did that to be 200% sure). Then short the power pins - the 3rd&4th upper pins, from left to right, on the Front Panel Header on the board, for 2min - just take a screw driver and place the metal part on those two pins and leave it for 2min. Or keep the power button on the board pressed for 2min, though people suggest 30sec is enough, but I'd rather be sure and keep it for 2min. Then remove the screwdriver/unoress power button and leave the board in the box overnight, still without the CMOS battery. 

Next day download the latest Media Creation Tool, from Microsoft, on your USB. Then place the CMOS battey back, and try a fresh install again, with m2 drive, but no other ssd or hdd. Before that check the BIOS if it sees your M2. 

I, of course, don't know, maybe you know all of that, but it's worth to try nonetheless if you didn't do the whole "deep cmos clearing" 😉 thing.


----------



## smilinjohn

DarthFK said:


> I don't know if you are interested to try and update the BIOS again, but I think you've mentioned that it's a Maximus board.



No this is a Strix board so no BIOS reflash, my Maximus is what I'm currently using. The board was shipped with the current BIOS version however I did try reflashing it once already from a separate USB stick from my Windows installed USB.





DarthFK said:


> Next day download the latest Media Creation Tool, from Microsoft, on your USB. Then place the CMOS battey back, and try a fresh install again, with m2 drive, but no other ssd or hdd. Before that check the BIOS if it sees your M2.
> 
> I, of course, don't know, maybe you know all of that, but it's worth to try nonetheless if you didn't do the whole "deep cmos clearing" 😉 thing.



I've never heard of that method of clearing the COMS, I may try it tonight when I get home. I also redid my Windows installer USB last night before bed it still hangs in the same place.


All of this would be great if it worked BUT this board should have been put through QA before they shipped it out. It's obviously a refurb board and this is why I refuse to buy refurb parts.


----------



## Jpmboy

smilinjohn said:


> Well, just bench tested the replacement board. *The M.2_2 slot doesn't recognize my M.2 WD Blue drive, and when I put the drive in the M.2_1 slot the OS hangs and won't load*.
> 
> 
> I've cleared the CMOS and RTC RAM multiple times, I've tried doing a clean install of W10 Pro 3 times.
> The Asus support center is trying to blame my installation media, a USB stick that I've used to install W10 before...
> The CSR COMPLETELY missed the M.2_2 slot not working refuses to anything more than escalating the problem to the next tier.
> Not happy with Asus ATM.


CSM enabled or disabled... or have you tried both?


----------



## DarthFK

smilinjohn said:


> No this is a Strix board so no BIOS reflash, my Maximus is what I'm currently using. The board was shipped with the current BIOS version however I did try reflashing it once already from a separate USB stick from my Windows installed USB.


Yeah, the regular reflash is just as fine.



smilinjohn said:


> I've never heard of that method of clearing the COMS, I may try it tonight when I get home. I also redid my Windows installer USB last night before bed it still hangs in the same place.


It's worth trying, I think. Bios is updated, now clear cmos, drain the power, even try another USB with latest Media Creation Tool and fresh install, without going into old Windows, just fresh install from the get go. If it works, it's good (that Maximus VIII didn't show error00 (no CPU) after that, I did a fresh install, then it worked). If it doesn't, you can then explain to Asus support that you reflashed the BIOS just in case, then cleared CMOS and even drained the MB of power overnight without the CMOS battery, then tried a fresh install from two different USBs with the latest Media Creation Tool and it still didn't work, which is the proof that you have tried everything and that the problem is on their end, because they sent you an unverified board with defects. And request a replacement.




smilinjohn said:


> All of this would be great if it worked BUT this board should have been put through QA before they shipped it out. It's obviously a refurb board and this is why I refuse to buy refurb parts.


They attempted to defy science in my case by claiming that non-conductive materials are conductive. So, I wouldn't expect much from them at this point. Also, don't forget, like so many companies and institutions here, the "left hand" has no clue what the "right hand" does. Hence some of the employees seem to take advantage of that, being minimalistic and perhaps even lazy. I told a manager that if I ran my office as they did, I would have been fired long time ago. They make tou go through the troubleshooting steps instead. Well, there is no choice left, so do that and see what happens, present evidence of different USBs with latest Media Creation Tool and complain.


----------



## DarthFK

P.S. anyway, in short, disconnect the power cable from PSU (I forgot, but just in case take out the cpu, ram and all else), take out the CMOS battery, short its contacts for over 10sec, then "short" those two pins that connect power on the front panel connector for 2min, then without the CMOS battery leave it overnight. After that put all back, place the battery back, only m2 in the right slot, and do a Media Creation Tool with another USB on another computer (it's super easy, I am sure you know). Then see what happens - either it's good, or complain.


----------



## Jpmboy

Rather than poking around with tweezers to short the battery socket, just hold down the MB start button or ground the F-panel header power button pin. Discharging on-board caps is what is being attempted here... not that I'm agreeing with this, but if that's what you want to do, there are easier ways.


----------



## smilinjohn

DarthFK said:


> It's worth trying, I think. Bios is updated, now clear cmos, drain the power, even try another USB with latest Media Creation Tool and fresh install, without going into old Windows, just fresh install from the get go. If it works, it's good (that Maximus VIII didn't show error00 (no CPU) after that, I did a fresh install, then it worked). If it doesn't, you can then explain to Asus support that you reflashed the BIOS just in case, then cleared CMOS and even drained the MB of power overnight without the CMOS battery, then tried a fresh install from two different USBs with the latest Media Creation Tool and it still didn't work, which is the proof that you have tried everything and that the problem is on their end, because they sent you an unverified board with defects. And request a replacement.



I'm beginning to wonder if it's a Microsoft issue.



I got myM.2 to work on an AsRock board, installed it in the Strix and it freezes with the little spinning dots. Moved it to my Maximus, same thing, and now my Maximus won't boot an OS, I don't know what the F*** is going on. I've tried media creation tools on two flash drives so far, got a third one being made as I type this on my laptop. NONE of my desktops are working ATM, I'm wondering if somehow I killed my NVME AND my M.2. Clean installs of Windows 10 Pro will not load on either board at this point and MS support has been useless thus far. I'm just about ready to give up on the whole dam thing. So mad right now it's unreal.


----------



## smilinjohn

So after fighting with trying to install W10 Pro on an M. and an NVME drive unsuccessfully 20ish times, trying different bios settings, RAM types/configurations, 4 different media installers I finally decided to try a mechanical HDD. On the Strix board, it installed on the HDD without a problem, migrated the OS to the M.2 drive board boots no problem and is currently the board I am working off of.


Tried the same process on the Maximus that was successful on the Strix no joy, installed failed multiple times, I even left it alone last night for 6 hours while I tried to get some sleep and it failed every time. I broke out my ASRock Phantom Gaming board this afternoon, transferred CPU and Ram to it, installed just the NVME drive and installed W10 Pro no problem first try from one of three USB sticks that had failed on the Asus boards. Transferred the NVME & CPU back to the Maximus board and after a successful boot on one stick of RAM I swapped out for my Trident Z RAM (4x8G 3200) and it gave me the Q code AU. Tried different ram types/configuration and finally got it to boot but the board will only get to post with memory in the B_1 and/or B_2 slot. Cleared CMOS, updated to the latest BIOS and if there is a stick of RAM in A_1 and/or A_2 I get the AU Q code...


So I had talked to a great lady named Kim from the Service Department for ASUS Office of the CEO last night about my CS experience and how unhappy I was, I explained the situation from start to the second act that I posted about here, and shared what I thought at the time which was beliving my problems were with the Strix replacement board. Today I called her back to say that I was wrong in assuming the Strix board was bad, shared with her what I had to do to resolve the issue, explained that I also had the exact same issue with my Maximus board, that I did not have the issue with an ASRock board, and that I didn't see a point in replacing the Strix board again since I finally had it up and running. While I had her on the phone I was going through the diagnostics on the Maximus and that's when I started having the Q code issue, so now were RMAing the Maximus board as well. 


I do have to say that Kim at Asus was great. She really took the time to listen to my issue. I feel much better talking to her than I did with their outsourced call center reps. Wish I could access someone whose first language is English all the time.



SOOO; Has anyone else here had an issue with installing Windows on their Asus board? At this point, I think there may be some weird reason the media installer doesn't want to play nice with the Asus BIOS?


----------



## chibi

smilinjohn said:


> SOOO; Has anyone else here had an issue with installing Windows on their Asus board? At this point, I think there may be some weird reason the media installer doesn't want to play nice with the Asus BIOS?



No problem here. I created a Win10 usb stick from the media tool 2 weeks ago to install on my Apex X board. Stuck it in a free usb slot and refreshed Windows without a problem. Sorry budd, I haven't had any issues with Asus boards since Sandybridge days.


----------



## DarthFK

Jpmboy said:


> Rather than poking around with tweezers to short the battery socket, just hold down the MB start button or ground the F-panel header power button pin. Discharging on-board caps is what is being attempted here... not that I'm agreeing with this, but if that's what you want to do, there are easier ways.


Yes, you were right about the purpose being draining the capacitors But in absence of a power button on the board I have suggested him shorting the F-panel connectors #3&4 (power) with a screwdriver and removing CMOS battery to make sure draining is complete. 

As to the CMOS, sometimes it just wouldn't clear, hence the need to take out the battery and short its (wide and fat) contacts before draining the capacitors. Since the contacts are so darn wide, there is no need to use tweezers (definitely not the ones from The Verge video, LOL  ) - just removing the battery and shorting the base & side contact with one single screwdriver will not harm anything ever and is an old and tried method on any board, when jumper method fails. Just my 2 cents

Anyway, that's unimportant, as @smilinjohn found a different workaround. Kind of.


----------



## DarthFK

smilinjohn said:


> SOOO; Has anyone else here had an issue with installing Windows on their Asus board? At this point, I think there may be some weird reason the media installer doesn't want to play nice with the Asus BIOS?


Sad to hear about so many problems you had with Asus. Darn,, I would be desperate by then, well, certainly not calm.

As to the media installer, no issues with three different chipsets on Maximus boards that are all here right now:

1. Maximus VIII Hero (z170) no problems with HDD yesterday and a regular SSD a week ago, didn't try Nvme, as it's the OS drive now in my main rig. I have other issues with this Maximus VIII, but no Windows installer problems on those HDD or SSD.

2. I've installed Windows 10 Pro some time ago on an SSD and later on a NVMe on my Maximus IX Hero (z270) that it''s in my main rig and I intend to pull out. The only problem I DID encounter with it, was my own mistake - I didn't make sure that the nvme was fully inserted in the socket. The motherboard initially didn't see it and I thought it was doa Rechecked and all went smoothly afterwards.

3. Also a painless install of Win10pro from MCTool on the Maximus X Hero (z370) that waits for its turn for the upgrade of my rig. Again, not on nvme, only on HDD and SSD, while testing it after purchase. 

And good thing that you have addressed the CEO's office. After I did, I got two messages on the same day, one form them and another from Lev3 support, with my problem solved. I don't know if their inquiry helped, but they replied and checked faster than any other Asus employee till then. I suspect CEO's office inquiring speeds up things Pity that it has to go that high, may result in future backlog there;|

P.S. Unrelated to you, my own saga update - just saw that Asus sent me a replacement board, with a different serial. Not sure if it's actually another board, as it was in repair, waiting for parts till now, and they may have reassigned another serial to the refurbished, who knows. Should arrive on Thursday, the exact day when I am at the college. Well, fingers crossed the replacement motherboard doesn't have any issues. xxx


----------



## smilinjohn

DarthFK said:


> Sad to hear about so many problems you had with Asus. Darn,, I would be desperate by then, well, certainly not calm.



Oh, it took me a while to calm down so I could be civil in a conversation. Funny thing though, I was telling a friend when she came by to pick up her son's phone I repaired, when it's someone else's device (phone, computer, car...) I don't get frustrated (cuss, growl, blood pressure going up) I'm just like "eh it's just a gadget", but when it's my stuff I start thinking that my 26oz ball-peen hammer will solve a lot of problems then I can mail the little pieces to the company and see if they can figure out what's wrong. 




DarthFK said:


> As to the media installer, no issues with three different chipsets on Maximus boards that are all here right now:
> 
> 1. Maximus VIII Hero (z170) no problems with HDD yesterday and a regular SSD a week ago, didn't try Nvme, as it's the OS drive now in my main rig. I have other issues with this Maximus VIII, but no Windows installer problems on those HDD or SSD.
> 
> 2. I've installed Windows 10 Pro some time ago on an SSD and later on a NVMe on my Maximus IX Hero (z270) that it''s in my main rig and I intend to pull out. The only problem I DID encounter with it, was my own mistake - I didn't make sure that the nvme was fully inserted in the socket. The motherboard initially didn't see it and I thought it was doa Rechecked and all went smoothly afterwards.
> 
> 3. Also a painless install of Win10pro from MCTool on the Maximus X Hero (z370) that waits for its turn for the upgrade of my rig. Again, not on nvme, only on HDD and SSD, while testing it after purchase.



Well, there goes that theory...


Makes me wonder WTH was going on. The MCT I used successfully on the ASRock board had failed on both Asus boards several times each. 




DarthFK said:


> And good thing that you have addressed the CEO's office. After I did, I got two messages on the same day, one form them and another from Lev3 support, with my problem solved. I don't know if their inquiry helped, but they replied and checked faster than any other Asus employee till then. I suspect CEO's office inquiring speeds up things Pity that it has to go that high, may result in future backlog there;|



I blame a lot of the issues (and have since the beginning of this issue) on the nature of cross-cultural communications. When your trying to communicate in a language that isn't the one you grew up with it creates misunderstandings, and in my conversation with Kim from Asus, I shared my observations and opinions. When your working for a company and you work a project with someone in another country (or from), establishing lines of effective communication is necessary and usually allocated for in time (which can take weeks or months) as well as understood. BUT when your asking customers who don't have that kind of time to wade through the difficulties and frustrations of having to try and achieve this in the span of a short phone call doesn't make sense if the end result is that frustrated customer goes with your competitor the next time they make a purchase. 




DarthFK said:


> P.S. Unrelated to you, my own saga update - just saw that Asus sent me a replacement board, with a different serial. Not sure if it's actually another board, as it was in repair, waiting for parts till now, and they may have reassigned another serial to the refurbished, who knows. Should arrive on Thursday, the exact day when I am at the college. Well, fingers crossed the replacement motherboard doesn't have any issues. xxx



I'd say they replaced it all together then if you're getting a different S/N. 



And for what it's worth, when Kim mentioned repair cost I remembered your post where you shared that the repair cost would be greater than buying a new board and shared that with her, she said they recently restructured the guidelines they use to determine repair cost, my guess is they may have a few things they need to work out concerning making estimations.


----------



## mattxx88

mattxx88 said:


> Cannot find any info about, i think it will, but i prefer ask to bo sure
> 
> i9 9900KS will be supported by z370 chipset? i want upgrade my 8086k when it will be available (Maximus X Formula)


seems we need newer bios to support 9900ks

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-9900ks-motherboard-firmware-update,40405.html

hope mine z370 Maximus X Formula will be updated


----------



## DarthFK

smilinjohn said:


> blood pressure going up


 Same here/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif



smilinjohn said:


> Makes me wonder WTH was going on. The MCT I used successfully on the ASRock board had failed on both Asus boards several times each.


Really weird. I used my MCT without any issue on an Asrock previously, on a z370 Gigabyte, and as recent as 3-4 days ago on another z390 Gigabyte and on all Asus boards, including that Asus z390-E that went into repairs.

The things that come to mind in such cases are all quite unlikely:
- security settings in Asus boards that block the USB boot. Very unlikely though.
- if you would have excluded USB booting, and CMOS was not cleared by the board properly, you would've known about that setting - and I really doubt that you had such a setting on both boards, unless it came with the boards. Still, clearing CMOS would have eliminated that. So, that's very, very unlikely from all angles.
- a virus, but then it's just at the level of loading Windows, hence I would seriously doubt it. And I guess you keep your system protected and it worked on Asrock. So, not really.
- one last thing is that my USB is a USB2.0 and I use it in USB2.0 ports, but I think I also used it in 3.0, which should negate such a port placement related issue.

Out of the hat, nothing else comes to mind now.



smilinjohn said:


> I blame a lot of the issues (and have since the beginning of this issue) on the nature of cross-cultural communications. When your trying to communicate in a language that isn't the one you grew up with it creates misunderstandings


I don't know, being a non-native English speaker myself and a person who was (briefly, but repeatedly) given guidelines on cross-cultural discrepancies, etc, I notice this less, but I do notice them and adjust. Perhaps I am used to some of them. Though, I do have varying examples:

To be fair, I have encountered issues in communication in my own language even yesterday, when I asked a guy I just met at an event - when did he arrive, continuing the line of thought related to our discussion about his new job and arrival to NY, and he replied - 15min ago 🙂 

On another hand, also to be fair, I have worked close to half of my professional life in an international environment and a German in charge of transportation once asked me yet in 1999 "why do we have misunderstandings when we all speak English" to which I have replied "But, my friend, we don't. We don't actually speak English. We do use English words, but only to speak our own languages" So, sure, there are discrepancies. I just don't think these are too much language related per se, partly yes, but rather the level education and even sometimes context (as with the guy above, who arrived "15 ago", as he was so focused on not missing his boss' arrival that he reverted his thinking from arriving to US, to that 15min ago "arrival" to make sure he is there to see his boss)

Though, I must also add that I had a US boss once, who very often asked "what do you mean". To me this meant that she was saying that I have a hidden (and therefore bad) meaning and I would reply (puzzled and upset for being suspected of double meanings) "I just said exactly what I meant, I don't mean anything else" till I actually got to live in the US... LoL. And the funny part is that we have in my language a question that sounds like "what do you have in your sight/mind" when asking the same, basically the exact same 'whatdayamean' 🙂 Still the word 'mean' is where the discrepancies lie. And I was right in front of another German in an airport, when he got really pissed with two Americans for the exact same words/question. For the same reason, he even used the same words as I usually did. Oh boy, it took me a while to calm him down and explain to the Americans why the German was so upset. My effort to avoid what seemed a really tense situation, was "rewarded" by "you are all crazy" from the US guys and weird looks from the German, as in their collective eyes I partly sided with what became "the other side"/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif Yet, no such problems arised when 'whatdayamean' came up from my boss with other Germans or French, well, or later, in another country with Americans and a Brit in the unit I led, even if Brit understood, but didn't use the "what do you mean" or at least I didn't hear him and his colleagues.

That's why I am more inclined to believe that it's a partly language, partly maybe it depends on the person's education/training as well. 

But I do simplify my message to non-native speakers of a language for that reason. Yet, in public communications one does that even to own language speakers if the listeners' level of understanding/education is uneven. So, there is that too when we talk to varying levels of Asus support, which is indeed frustrating, as we expect to be understood, while they are actually just "mail boxes" forwarding other people's messages, not tech experts.



smilinjohn said:


> And for what it's worth, when Kim mentioned repair cost I remembered your post where you shared that the repair cost would be greater than buying a new board and shared that with her, she said they recently restructured the guidelines they use to determine repair cost, my guess is they may have a few things they need to work out concerning making estimations.


Ah, that was one of their dispute points! When I initiated the dispute for their quote, I pressed the Dispute button in the email to reply tobthem, and one of the options they offer in the follow up to that is "the cost of repair is greater than the cost of the item". So, I did mention it to them on (that) purpose, but forgot to mention the reasoning here, on the forum. Good that you've picked up on that, they do pay attention to that. 

Well, let's see what happens next with your RMA.


----------



## smilinjohn

DarthFK said:


> Same here/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> Really weird. I used my MCT without any issue on an Asrock previously, on a z370 Gigabyte, and as recent as 3-4 days ago on another z390 Gigabyte and on all Asus boards, including that Asus z390-E that went into repairs.
> 
> The things that come to mind in such cases are all quite unlikely:
> - security settings in Asus boards that block the USB boot. Very unlikely though.
> - if you would have excluded USB booting, and CMOS was not cleared by the board properly, you would've known about that setting - and I really doubt that you had such a setting on both boards, unless it came with the boards. Still, clearing CMOS would have eliminated that. So, that's very, very unlikely from all angles.



Well, I went to BIOS and set it to boot from the USB as a boot override. 

I have a small collection jumpers leftover from the ATA drive days when you had to install them on HDDs to set the primary drive (master/slave), they come in REAL handy when your benching a board and don't have a power button to hook to the header, need to short the power pins to drain the caps or jump the CLRTC pins which the Maximus has a button for anyway.




DarthFK said:


> - a virus, but then it's just at the level of loading Windows, hence I would seriously doubt it. And I guess you keep your system protected and it worked on Asrock. So, not really.
> - one last thing is that my USB is a USB2.0 and I use it in USB2.0 ports, but I think I also used it in 3.0, which should negate such a port placement related issue.



That consideration is what made me remake the MCT the first time. I had to use a different computer (my laptop) that only gets turned on at 1 class once a week, and yes I keep my machines pretty clean. I haven't had a virus since my son who was in high school at the time got my machine infected going to porn websites. That was over 10 years ago.






DarthFK said:


> the level education and even sometimes context



Level of education for sure, but the context is where the misunderstandings come into play more often I think. Even Brits and Americans hit those obstacles because we don't understand the context the other uses clearly. 




DarthFK said:


> Well, let's see what happens next with your RMA.



I won't get it shipped out until tomorrow, I have too much going on today and last night I was putting my apartment back together after messing with the two motherboards.


I might sit down this weekend and try reinstalling an OS on the Strix board again, this time with a fresh drive, I just got 2 WD black NVME drives in a 500GB and a 1TB.


----------



## nezff

Is anyone running the corsair vengeance rgb pro on their Asus Prime Z390-a board? It's not on the QVL list, but it's basically the same vengeance ram I have which is the vengeance 2666mghz rgb 16gb kit.


----------



## kevindd992002

It's been years since I overclocked my system (2600K era) and I now have the time to dive into this again but don't know where to start. Is there some sort of a guide in overclocking the 8700K with an ASUS Maximus X Code board? I have a custom watercooling loop with this system.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Jpmboy sig link has a guide:

*https://www.overclock.net/forum/28129344-post3582.html*


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ and the link still works! :thumb:


----------



## DarthFK

Another UPDATE on my side: 
Finally got my replacement z390-e board from Asus, I only had time to open it on Saturday aaaaaand............... it had some small piece of junk in the socket. My son looked at it and said - hey, dad, it's like someone had a hamburger, a crumb fell in and the guy sad "nah, he won't see it" and left it there. 

I then replied to the CEO office email and informed him about yet another 'puckup' on their side. The CEO sent me another RMA label with this board serial aaaaaand... their serial number on record and the RMA board that I received had different serial numbers! They thought I have one board, but I had another. I've sent pictures, but if it wasn't for this repeated RMA, they could have claimed whatever they wanted later... 

Quality control? "Nah, they won't see it" But the CEO's office person did fix the s/number issue. 

It seems that Asus QC and functionality is so bad that they employed another line of customer service reps at CEO's office. As a former efficiency evaluator in a project, I would say that investing in the QC on the ground would have probably been better and cheaper, but, hey, if my problem gets solved "only" after two RMAs and about a month, why would I complain, right?


----------



## D-EJ915

That sucks man, my Apex XI actually had a piece of cardboard "flake" or something in the pins when I got it. I blew it out and it came right out lol, it was still pretty sketchy though on a new product though.


----------



## kevindd992002

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Jpmboy sig link has a guide:
> 
> *https://www.overclock.net/forum/28129344-post3582.html*





Jpmboy said:


> ^^ and the link still works! :thumb:


Nice! Let me read on that and start OC'ing the hell out of this system


----------



## DarthFK

Delidded or not?


----------



## DarthFK

kevindd992002 said:


> MrTOOSHORT said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jpmboy sig link has a guide:
> 
> *https://www.overclock.net/forum/28129344-post3582.html*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jpmboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ^^ and the link still works! /forum/images/smilies/thumb.gif
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nice! Let me read on that and start OC'ing the hell out of this system /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

Delidded or not?


----------



## kevindd992002

DarthFK said:


> Delidded or not?


Delidded by RockItCool themselves. I availed their delidding service when I was in the US.


----------



## smilinjohn

DarthFK said:


> but, hey, if my problem gets solved "only" after two RMAs and about a month, why would I complain, right?



Right? Starting to think maybe Asus is going to lose the top spot in my preferred hardware list. 



Got my Maximus back yesterday, at first the board wouldn't power up at all. The LEDs were on, the CPU fan spun once, then it wouldn't power on at all. Cleared the CMOS, again, the LEDs were on, the CPU fan spun once, then it wouldn't power on at all. Had to clear the CMOS four times to finally get the board to post. Once I had the board booted into an OS it wouldn't shut down at all, when I went to shut down in the OS it would just restart. I think something is going on with the on-board power button, but it'll be this weekend before I can really get into checking it out.


----------



## DarthFK

smilinjohn said:


> Right? Starting to think maybe Asus is going to lose the top spot in my preferred hardware list.
> 
> Got my Maximus back yesterday, at first the board wouldn't power up at all. The LEDs were on, the CPU fan spun once, then it wouldn't power on at all. Cleared the CMOS, again, the LEDs were on, the CPU fan spun once, then it wouldn't power on at all. Had to clear the CMOS four times to finally get the board to post. Once I had the board booted into an OS it wouldn't shut down at all, when I went to shut down in the OS it would just restart. I think something is going on with the on-board power button, but it'll be this weekend before I can really get into checking it out.


Their UEFI is great and VRMs up to Maximus X are great too (though XI is a bit less, due to them switching to a 4x2VRM design, instead of previous 8 - they still use quality components, so , as Buidlzoid put is, it's just ok for a 9900k, which means it's still good, but...). I used an Asrock z370 Taichi board for my son's 8700k 5GHz and it was simple and very pleasant, with an excellent power delivery and particularly RAM XMP could go really high on that board, a thing AsRock is known for. However, I myself found a supremely well priced 7700k and due to RGB integration and Asus software and past VRM quality went with a full combo of Asus GPU RX580 and a Maximus IX Hero no WiFi (I installed a separate WiFi module from a z270-e myself, bought it separately and Hero had the slot to connect it under the IO shroud). This Maximus IX has one little LAN issue - it disrupts the modem on PC bootup, but then recovers - I am not sure if it's my added WiFi or the LAN chip is at fault, so I am not complaining too much about the quality, but OMG what happens when you DO have an actual hardware problem... 

The hickups in services and a very high level of oversight at almost all levels is astonishing! 

- In my case the techs claimed non-conductive materials brought in conductive damage. They even wrote oxidization of the board!!! That was just thermal paste on the board. Grey thermal paste! For your own sake, use a bit of an electric contact cleaner and the non-existent "oxidization" will turn out top be a thermal paste non-problem (as no oxidization was ever there, not a drop of water touched this board). That lazy trick with misrepresentation of the problem, I suppose, is done to charge the customer. Here is my free advise that will not be taken: hire a competent hardware QC manager designated to deal with emergency cases, but then the customers will not be charges so often and the company won't turn profit on their backs.

- they send replacement boards that are essentially defective - here, definitely, a QC tech with a strict oversight (the more are returned after RMA is completed, the more we'll pull form your salary) would be helpful. Rough, but isn't that a business that should control it's own employees instead of charging customers for Asus mistakes? Apparently no...

- in my case they even sent a board with a different SN than in their system (obviously affecting warranty afterwards) - same suggestion with final control and QC, looking at total # of reprimands with final pay impact per month or quarter. 

- their support is split in groups that do not communicate with each other - create a single online database of the RMA with techs writing in it. Even I can check my RMA status, why can't you Asus guys?

I think I can go on, to the point I am ready to scream - ffs, hire me as an "improvement" (QC?) manager and you'll have improvements in no time (well, yeah, easy to say for me Anyway, despite a very occasional efficiency evaluation, my area is different and I'd be rather focusing on their external partnerships, but, anyway, despite my specialization in other areas, compared to what I currently see with Asus, I feel a genius.


----------



## DarthFK

kevindd992002 said:


> Delidded by RockItCool themselves. I availed their delidding service when I was in the US.


Didn't know they do delidding. I used "Silicon Lottery" services for my 7700k. Good to know.

My son's delidded 8700k required 1.36vcore for 5GHz. This might seem relatively high, compared to other results - some people had better luck, bu that's truly silicon lottery. And this is definitely under 1.45vcore that is too much for daily use. I still need to fiddle with AVX value on it, but it stayed at 5GHz with 0avx till now for gaming. I think I switched it to 2AVX for now, just in case (lowering the core speed from 5GHz to 4.8GHz (minus 2 avx) for any software that might use avx instructions). 

Good guide from Jpmboy! On another hand, if you want it visual and simple, well, der8auer has a quick and useful guide here that will get you fast enough to a good OC:


----------



## kevindd992002

DarthFK said:


> Didn't know they do delidding. I used "Silicon Lottery" services for my 7700k. Good to know.
> 
> My son's delidded 8700k required 1.36vcore for 5GHz. This might seem relatively high, compared to other results - some people had better luck, bu that's truly silicon lottery. And this is definitely under 1.45vcore that is too much for daily use. I still need to fiddle with AVX value on it, but it stayed at 5GHz with 0avx till now for gaming. I think I switched it to 2AVX for now, just in case (lowering the core speed from 5GHz to 4.8GHz (minus 2 avx) for any software that might use avx instructions).
> 
> Good guide from Jpmboy! On another hand, if you want it visual and simple, well, der8auer has a quick and useful guide here that will get you fast enough to a good OC:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoUtA7DKXhU


It's not something they advertise but they do it for customers on a case-to-case basis, I guess. One thing I know is that they really value customer service.

Ok, that's good to know. Thanks for the video too. I'll have a lot of experimenting to do but I'll update this thread along the way if I have more questions. What frequency is one's goals in trying to overclock an 8700K though? Would you say 5GHz is the average OC that people reach? 5.1 or 5.2 GHz?


----------



## DarthFK

Before going to bed so darn late 

Generally 4.9-5Ghz is the expected OC. Silicon Lottery had percentages at times and, if I remember correctly the 4.9-5Ghz are expected, but... you never know how that goes in each and individual case. 

Also, you might want to consider the thread for overclocking, rather than "our" Asus motherboard "official" thread 😉 - check what people say there on the 8700k settings thread (though, to be honest, Der8auer's video is more than enough for understanding OCing, even simply replicating the exact settings and then starting fine tuning from there), but anyway, the 8700k thread:
https://www.overclock.net/#/topics/1639998?page=1


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> It's not something they advertise but they do it for customers on a case-to-case basis, I guess. One thing I know is that they really value customer service.
> 
> Ok, that's good to know. Thanks for the video too. I'll have a lot of experimenting to do but I'll update this thread along the way if I have more questions. What frequency is one's goals in trying to overclock an 8700K though? Would you say 5GHz is the average OC that people reach? 5.1 or 5.2 GHz?


 From what I've seen most 8700Ks are 5.2 24/7 capable depending upon cooling (and delid thermal bondline) - delid is a must for these frequencies. Both my 8700K and 8086K are 24/7 5.2. tho the 8086K does it at 75mV lower vcore. Both run the same 2x8GB G.Skill ram kit at 4500c16 stable.
Shoot for 5GHz on all cores as a start and if the chip has the OC headroom you can normally run a water cooled system in the 1.45V range if the chip needs it.
Here's my 8086K (it's what I have in the APEX atm). Yes, that is 1.6V vdimm on the GS Royals. Been there for months now.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Jpmboy said:


> From what I've seen most 8700Ks are 5.2 24/7 capable depending upon cooling (and delid thermal bondline) - delid is a must for these frequencies. Both my 8700K and 8086K are 24/7 5.2. tho the 8086K does it at 75mV lower vcore. Both run the same 2x8GB G.Skill ram kit at 4500c16 stable.
> Shoot for 5GHz on all cores as a start and if the chip has the OC headroom you can normally run a water cooled system in the 1.45V range if the chip needs it.
> Here's my 8086K (it's what I have in the APEX atm). Yes, that is 1.6V vdimm on the GS Royals. Been there for months now.


I couldn't do that with my 8700k, it was pretty average, ended up with 4.9Ghz using the same voltage as your 5.2Ghz, it was the heavier AVX loads were unstable (you know me though, had to be stable all round).
The new 9900k will easily do 5Ghz all core at about 1.3v, though heavier AVX (Small FFT, LinX etc) I've had to set power limits due to temps hitting 85c under a H150i, but I will be investing in my first water cooling setup soon, 2x 350mm RADs in the O-11 Dynamic should work well to get those temps down, plus I already have the fans for it..


----------



## xSneak

Anyone have experience running an intel 905p m.2 boot drive on the z390 maximus xi boards? Are there any special settings I need to enable in the bios?


----------



## ntuason

Hey Guys,

I just picked up an ASUS ROG Maximus XI Hero (Wi-Fi) (coming form Aorus Master) and the bios is just overwhelming on the Asus. 
Is there a way to turn off AI overclocking because when I set my VCCIO & VCCSA to 1.2v manually after resetting the motherboard sets it it 1.35-1.4v which I think is way too high. And that’s at stock memory settings 3600mhz CL18.


----------



## Falkentyne

ntuason said:


> Hey Guys,
> 
> I just picked up an ASUS ROG Maximus XI Hero (Wi-Fi) (coming form Aorus Master) and the bios is just overwhelming on the Asus.
> Is there a way to turn off AI overclocking because when I set my VCCIO & VCCSA to 1.2v manually after resetting the motherboard sets it it 1.35-1.4v which I think is way too high. And that’s at stock memory settings 3600mhz CL18.


Set MCE to disabled if that even helps.
How is the CPU overclocking stress test voltage compared to your Master? Your Vcore sensor in windows should be the same as what VR VOUT was so it's accurate.


----------



## xSneak

ntuason said:


> Hey Guys,
> 
> I just picked up an ASUS ROG Maximus XI Hero (Wi-Fi) (coming form Aorus Master) and the bios is just overwhelming on the Asus.
> Is there a way to turn off AI overclocking because when I set my VCCIO & VCCSA to 1.2v manually after resetting the motherboard sets it it 1.35-1.4v which I think is way too high. And that’s at stock memory settings 3600mhz CL18.


There is a setting in the bios to disable the Ai overclocking. I would recommend turning off the asus crapware installer from the bios also, its one of the options in the right pages of the bios.
https://www.techpowerup.com/248827/...-push-software-into-your-windows-installation


----------



## ntuason

Falkentyne said:


> Set MCE to disabled if that even helps.
> How is the CPU overclocking stress test voltage compared to your Master? Your Vcore sensor in windows should be the same as what VR VOUT was so it's accurate.


Disabling MCE didn’t help. I’m starting to regret replacing my Aorus master with this LOL. I can’t even hit 4000MHz oc on my memory where as my Master did 4133MHz CL18... I’m starting to think I got a dud mobo? If that’s even possible. 

The one thing I like about Asus Maximus Hero is it requires way less voltage to run my 9900k at 5GHz all cores. My Master needed about 1.35v to 1.36v no 0 AVX LLC set to High where as the Asus only needs 1.32v and LLC set to Level 6 (I don’t know what that translates to in Gigabytes LLC) 0 AVX, on ChinebenchR15/20, Realbench, LinX and PC Mark.

This board angers me! Whenever I hear it trying to boot up the mild OC and it keeps restarting arg!!!


----------



## DarthFK

ntuason said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> Set MCE to disabled if that even helps.
> How is the CPU overclocking stress test voltage compared to your Master? Your Vcore sensor in windows should be the same as what VR VOUT was so it's accurate.
> 
> 
> 
> Disabling MCE didnâ€™️t help. Iâ€™️m starting to regret replacing my Aorus master with this LOL. I canâ€™️t even hit 4000MHz oc on my memory where as my Master did 4133MHz CL18... Iâ€™️m starting to think I got a dud mobo? If thatâ€™️s even possible.
> 
> The one thing I like about Asus Maximus Hero is it requires way less voltage to run my 9900k at 5GHz all cores. My Master needed about 1.35v to 1.36v no 0 AVX LLC set to High where as the Asus only needs 1.32v and LLC set to Level 6 (I donâ€™️t know what that translates to in Gigabytes LLC) 0 AVX, on ChinebenchR15/20, Realbench, LinX and PC Mark.
> 
> This board angers me! Whenever I hear it trying to boot up the mild OC and it keeps restarting arg!!!
Click to expand...

Well, I have an Aorus Ultra in my son's rig and will install a Maximus X in my own. We are coming from Asrock & Asus boards respectively. Asrock...rocks in RAM oc, too bad their VRM is slightly weaker than Aorus'es, otherwise it's a great overclocker.

As to the AI - just set the AI to XMP is you want XMP enabled and answer "No" to the XMP related popup as you'll oc by yourself. Otherwise you can also select "manual" and oc the RAM separately from the CPU.

3. Darn... too long 🙂 - I've already posted a great OC guide from Der8auer himself. And JPMboy has a guide in his sig. They should help you fine tune it. Here is Der8auer's again:
https://youtu.be/CoUtA7DKXhU


----------



## Falkentyne

ntuason said:


> Disabling MCE didn’t help. I’m starting to regret replacing my Aorus master with this LOL. I can’t even hit 4000MHz oc on my memory where as my Master did 4133MHz CL18... I’m starting to think I got a dud mobo? If that’s even possible.
> 
> The one thing I like about Asus Maximus Hero is it requires way less voltage to run my 9900k at 5GHz all cores. My Master needed about 1.35v to 1.36v no 0 AVX LLC set to High where as the Asus only needs 1.32v and LLC set to Level 6 (I don’t know what that translates to in Gigabytes LLC) 0 AVX, on ChinebenchR15/20, Realbench, LinX and PC Mark.
> 
> This board angers me! Whenever I hear it trying to boot up the mild OC and it keeps restarting arg!!!


LLC High on Gigabyte is 0.8 mOhms of loadline.
Turbo is 0.4 mOhms.
LLC6 on Asus is = LLC Turbo.
Set your LLC to LLC5 and see what happens.

Elmor replied very recently in the VRM thread (I think?) saying changing boards that are not low quality may only give 30 mhz higher (or lower) speed at the same voltage (measured on the die, not by sensors, unless it's VR VOUT or Maximus XI Vcore sensors).

Someone earlier (maybe @Intrud3r ?) I forgot...it was months ago? changed his Aorus Master to an XI Hero and said he needed more vcore and the chip ran hotter (XI Hero has the recalibrated SIO sensor), so he went back to the Master.


----------



## DarthFK

Falkentyne said:


> ntuason said:
> 
> 
> 
> Disabling MCE didnâ€™️t help. Iâ€™️m starting to regret replacing my Aorus master with this LOL. I canâ€™️t even hit 4000MHz oc on my memory where as my Master did 4133MHz CL18... Iâ€™️m starting to think I got a dud mobo? If thatâ€™️s even possible.
> 
> The one thing I like about Asus Maximus Hero is it requires way less voltage to run my 9900k at 5GHz all cores. My Master needed about 1.35v to 1.36v no 0 AVX LLC set to High where as the Asus only needs 1.32v and LLC set to Level 6 (I donâ€™️t know what that translates to in Gigabytes LLC) 0 AVX, on ChinebenchR15/20, Realbench, LinX and PC Mark.
> 
> This board angers me! Whenever I hear it trying to boot up the mild OC and it keeps restarting arg!!!
> 
> 
> 
> LLC High on Gigabyte is 0.8 mOhms of loadline.
> Turbo is 0.4 mOhms.
> LLC6 on Asus is = LLC Turbo.
> Set your LLC to LLC5 and see what happens.
> 
> Elmor replied very recently in the VRM thread (I think?) saying changing boards that are not low quality may only give 30 mhz higher (or lower) speed at the same voltage (measured on the die, not by sensors, unless it's VR VOUT or Maximus XI Vcore sensors).
> 
> Someone earlier (maybe @Intrud3r ?) I forgot...it was months ago? changed his Aorus Master to an XI Hero and said he needed more vcore and the chip ran hotter (XI Hero has the recalibrated SIO sensor), so he went back to the Master.
Click to expand...

The VRM on Maximus XI is 4x2 as Buildzoid explained, compared to 5x2 Asrock and 6x2 Aorus, so...


----------



## schoolofmonkey

ntuason said:


> Hey Guys,
> 
> I just picked up an ASUS ROG Maximus XI Hero (Wi-Fi) (coming form Aorus Master) and the bios is just overwhelming on the Asus.
> Is there a way to turn off AI overclocking because when I set my VCCIO & VCCSA to 1.2v manually after resetting the motherboard sets it it 1.35-1.4v which I think is way too high. And that’s at stock memory settings 3600mhz CL18.


I need 1.2 VCCIO and 1.23 VCCSA on my Apex XI 3200Mhz G-Skill Trident RGB, any lower and I get Cache errors in HWinfo.
Ram timings are 16-18-18-38/

I posted a screenshot of my hwinfo, those are what I need for 5Ghz all core 0 AVX offset.
I still needed to set a Power limit for small fft AVX loads to keep the heat in check, plus I need more voltage which is stupid as nothing besides linx/prime95/OCCT small fft's draw power like that.


----------



## Batman1982

ntuason said:


> Hey Guys,
> 
> I just picked up an ASUS ROG Maximus XI Hero (Wi-Fi) (coming form Aorus Master) and the bios is just overwhelming on the Asus.
> Is there a way to turn off AI overclocking because when I set my VCCIO & VCCSA to 1.2v manually after resetting the motherboard sets it it 1.35-1.4v which I think is way too high. And that’s at stock memory settings 3600mhz CL18.


Had the same issue, maybe the mem ok switch is on. When i turned mem ok off ( switch on the board) then my changes will not be overwritten.


----------



## ntuason

Well I read and watched all the guides to no avail. Packing this board and exchanging it tomorrow. Thank you all for your suggestions.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> LLC High on Gigabyte is 0.8 mOhms of loadline.
> Turbo is 0.4 mOhms.
> LLC6 on Asus is = LLC Turbo.
> Set your LLC to LLC5 and see what happens.
> 
> Elmor replied very recently in the VRM thread (I think?) saying changing boards that are not low quality may only give 30 mhz higher (or lower) speed at the same voltage (measured on the die, not by sensors, unless it's VR VOUT or Maximus XI Vcore sensors).
> 
> Someone earlier (maybe @Intrud3r ?) I forgot...it was months ago? changed his Aorus Master to an XI Hero and said he needed more vcore and the chip ran hotter (XI Hero has the recalibrated SIO sensor), so he went back to the Master.


Wasn't me, I'm still rocking my Ultra board. Still happy with it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Batman1982 said:


> Had the same issue, maybe the mem ok switch is on. When i turned mem ok off ( switch on the board) then my changes will not be overwritten.


^^ This.


----------



## Lavandr

smilinjohn said:


> Has anyone else here had an issue with installing Windows on their Asus board? At this point, I think there may be some weird reason the media installer doesn't want to play nice with the Asus BIOS?


I have exactly the same issue with my brand new setup of Strix Z390-E. I spent whole day trying to start W10 Pro installer from USB stick, and it never comes to the initial window. At the very beginning, when progress wheel starts rotating, the MB reboots without any error message. When it boots again from USB and starts W10 installer, all repeats - MB goes down and reboots. After numerous failures with USB, I attached SATA DVD drive and tried to install W10 from DVD, but installer failed the same way. When I tested my USB stick on MSI X99 setup (my 2nd system), Windows installer showed the initial window no issue. So, the problem is not with installation media. My last attempt was to start Windows 7 installer from my old W7 DVD. Installation fails the same way! I did not get initial W7 installation screen, MB rebooted.

Are there more people, who have the same issue? Is mobo replacement the only option?


----------



## Batman1982

Got yesterday my new XI extreme ( before hero XI but the look of the big board is awesome ) 
What is the best stable bios for this? 
I‘ve a 9900k 4x8Gb of Ram 4000c17


----------



## Jpmboy

Batman1982 said:


> Got yesterday my new XI extreme ( before hero XI but the look of the big board is awesome )
> What is the best stable bios for this?
> I‘ve a 9900k 4x8Gb of Ram 4000c17


1105 or higher. :thumb:


----------



## Batman1982

Thanks 🙂


----------



## coalscence

Hi guys,
I have already posted this on the VRM discussion thread but I think my question fits this thread better so my apologies.
I have an Asus Prime z370-A motherboard and have just purchased a 9900KF processor. How risky would it be to run a 9900KF with that mobo? My cooler is a Noctua NH-U12A. Would I be able to push 5 or 4.9GHZ or is it not recommended? I suppose I can lower the exhaust fan of my CPU cooler a little bit so the airflow is directed at the VRM heatsink that's near the I/O ports, and I can stick an additional 40mm Noctua fan at the top VRM heatsink, would that make things any better and allow me to overclock?

Otherwise how much performance loss am I seeing by using this board compared to let's say an Aorus z390 elite? Thanks a lot, I appreciate any help


----------



## SpeedyIV

So I had a set of G.Skill F4-3200C14-8GTZR (2 x 8G DIMMs) in slots A2 and B2 in my Max X Hero (wifi). Recently I bought a set of G.Skill F4-3200C14D-32GTZR (2 x16G DIMMs) that are tentatively ear marked for a Ryzen build this fall. In the mean time, I stuck it in the Max X Hero to check that it works, which it does. I am going to just leave it in there until I need it for the new build. But what to do with the 2 old 8G DIMMs? Might as well use them right? So I installed them in slots A1 and B1. I realize I am not only mixing kits, I am mixing DIMM sizes. With XMP disabled, it boots and I see 48G of RAM, so that's good. What I am not sure about is if it would be better to put the 16G DIMMs in slots A1 and B1 and the 8G DIMMs in slots A2 and B2, or if it makes any difference.

The manual says, "You may install varying memory sizes in Channel A and Channel B. The system maps the total size of the lower-sized channel for the dual-channel configuration. Any excess memory from the higher-sized channel is then mapped for single-channel operation."

So maybe I should put 16G DIMMs in slots A1 and A2 and the 8G DIMMs in slots B1 and B2? Does it even matter? I don;t know if the XMP profiles would work or if I should even try to push these CL14 mixed kits, but I am OK at stock for now so long as they work.

Thanks!


----------



## Jpmboy

coalscence said:


> Hi guys,
> I have already posted this on the VRM discussion thread but I think my question fits this thread better so my apologies.
> I have an Asus Prime z370-A motherboard and have just purchased a 9900KF processor. How risky would it be to run a 9900KF with that mobo? My cooler is a Noctua NH-U12A. Would I be able to push 5 or 4.9GHZ or is it not recommended? I suppose I can lower the exhaust fan of my CPU cooler a little bit so the airflow is directed at the VRM heatsink that's near the I/O ports, and I can stick an additional 40mm Noctua fan at the top VRM heatsink, would that make things any better and allow me to overclock?
> 
> Otherwise how much performance loss am I seeing by using this board compared to let's say an Aorus z390 elite? Thanks a lot, I appreciate any help


frankly, on either board, the Noctua air cooler (and air is a good one) is gonna be the OC limiter.


SpeedyIV said:


> So I had a set of G.Skill F4-3200C14-8GTZR (2 x 8G DIMMs) in slots A2 and B2 in my Max X Hero (wifi). Recently I bought a set of G.Skill F4-3200C14D-32GTZR (2 x16G DIMMs) that are tentatively ear marked for a Ryzen build this fall. In the mean time, I stuck it in the Max X Hero to check that it works, which it does. I am going to just leave it in there until I need it for the new build. But what to do with the 2 old 8G DIMMs? Might as well use them right? So I installed them in slots A1 and B1. I realize I am not only mixing kits, I am mixing DIMM sizes. With XMP disabled, it boots and I see 48G of RAM, so that's good. What I am not sure about is if it would be better to put the 16G DIMMs in slots A1 and B1 and the 8G DIMMs in slots A2 and B2, or if it makes any difference.
> 
> The manual says, "You may install varying memory sizes in Channel A and Channel B. The system maps the total size of the lower-sized channel for the dual-channel configuration. Any excess memory from the higher-sized channel is then mapped for single-channel operation."
> 
> So maybe I should put 16G DIMMs in slots A1 and A2 and the 8G DIMMs in slots B1 and B2? Does it even matter? I don;t know if the XMP profiles would work or if I should even try to push these CL14 mixed kits, but I am OK at stock for now so long as they work.
> 
> Thanks!


So besides the novelty/challenge, do you need to have 48GB resulting in mixed single and dual channel mapping? Put the 16GB sticks in A1 and B1 (what ever the dual channel config would be without the 8GB sticks), and the remainder in the empty slots. You do know this breaks any benefit of performance either kits can provide solo, right?


----------



## KedarWolf

https://ca.ign.com/articles/2019/10/03/intel-core-x-cascade-lake-x-processors

Intel’s last top-end 18-core CPU, the Intel Core i9-9980XE, went for a cool $1,999 at launch, but its replacement, the Intel Core i9-10980XE, costs half as much at only $979.

https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel/core-i9-10980xe-5-1-ghz-overclock-standard-liquid-cooling

Intel's upcoming Cascade Lake X processors aren’t just suddenly way more affordable, they also seem to be pretty impressive overclockers too. At least that’s what Intel is telling us. The 18-core Core i9 10980XE – the HEDT CPU with an unfeasibly long number string – is reportedly capable of hitting 5.1GHz on all cores with just a little judicious core overclocking.

Guess what I'm getting tax refund time next spring!!

Well, will have to see the new Threadripper but I'm an Intel fanboy for sure, not really impressed with the 3900x etc.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Yeah (a bit off topic here), I'm seriously considering switching my M11E/9900K to R6EE/10980XE with a custom watercooling in my new PC O11 XL.
Exciting times !


----------



## SpeedyIV

Jpmboy said:


> frankly, on either board, the Noctua air cooler (and air is a good one) is gonna be the OC limiter.
> 
> So besides the novelty/challenge, do you need to have 48GB resulting in mixed single and dual channel mapping? Put the 16GB sticks in A1 and B1 (what ever the dual channel config would be without the 8GB sticks), and the remainder in the empty slots. You do know this breaks any benefit of performance either kits can provide solo, right?


Yeah I know that and I will take the 8G DIMMs out then tune up the new kit. They run OK at stock but its not a situation I am inclined to leave running. Thanks


----------



## postem

*Hero X Z370 - For 9900K/F*

Hi, im considering putting an 9900K or KF on my hero z370.

So for for a 8700K 1.345v 5GHZ, delided, its working very well, temps never go higher than 70C, even on summer.
I know mostly i will get a marginal benefit from going into 9900K, especially considering im just using this rig for gaming.

Hero x revision 1.01. I dunno if this or not the doubler version, it would probably only have hot spots impact on vrm.

I know the VRM is able to deal with 9900K, its 50A x 8, so its more than enough, my main concern is, the vrm heatsink is enough to hold 9900K 5GHZ, considering i can cool it? Cpu is using Noctua DH15, case is h500M, air flow is pretty massive on this case.

The fact of the board having or not doublers could induce hot spots on the vrm heat sinks? Unfortunately there isnt much way to be certain of vrm temperatures, there isnt a sensor reported on Hwinfo saying vrm temps, althrough there are 5 different temps reported, ranging from 14 (clearly wrong) to other ranging from 40 - 50C. Some say th e t2 report vrm or is a thermistor near the vrm area, that could be infered some correlation to vrm temps.

Theorically, for a maxxed 9900K, it would be 25A per mosfet, i didnt checkout eficiency levels, but considering 3W per mosfet, it would be roughly between 10-24W from a regular load to a maxed load. It probably would be active cooled by noctua dual 150mm fans, but still, i think the vrm heatsinks are sub optimal, they arent joined by a heat pipe and barely have any fins.


----------



## chibi

xSneak said:


> There is a setting in the bios to disable the Ai overclocking. I would recommend turning off the asus crapware installer from the bios also, its one of the options in the right pages of the bios.
> https://www.techpowerup.com/248827/...-push-software-into-your-windows-installation



Good tip, I'll have to check for this and disable. :thumb:


----------



## DarthFK

Kind of a final update on my previous ruckus with Asus RMA - they delivered a new open box motherboard, Asus z390-E. I'm not even testing it, just selling it, as I got a Maximus X in the meantime. And, of course, my Enermax Liqmax II 240 backplate washer turned out to be cracked (I didn't know about Enermax LiqTech problems reported by GN when I bought it, but I hope that the one I have would not have problems soon, as it's not LiqTech - still, the first thing to be replaced in the near future would be it). Anyway, Enermax sent me a replacement, so the Asus Maximus X Hero WiFi is already in the case with my 9700k, but not connected, while post-RMA z390-E is already on ebay and I am getting low-balled, of course. 

It just took a month and a half to get the z390-e back, after all the "liquid damage" by non-conductive thermal paste claims by Asus "pros", then them sending me a board with a debris/crumb(?) inside the socket. Addressing CEO's office was the last and only solution that worked and they sent a "new" one.


----------



## SpeedyIV

New BIOS released for Max X Hero.

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO/HelpDesk_BIOS/

Version 2203
2019/10/1710.39 MBytes
ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO BIOS 2203
1) Support Intel upcoming CPU
2) Improved system stability and performance
3) Update RAID driver to rev. 17.5
4) Support Intel Optane Memory H10 device
5) Update ME firmware for Intel security issue.
Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (M10H.CAP) using BIOSRenamer


----------



## DarthFK

SpeedyIV said:


> New BIOS released for Max X Hero.
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO/HelpDesk_BIOS/
> 
> Version 2203
> 2019/10/1710.39 MBytes
> ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO BIOS 2203
> 1) Support Intel upcoming CPU
> 2) Improved system stability and performance
> 3) Update RAID driver to rev. 17.5
> 4) Support Intel Optane Memory H10 device
> 5) Update ME firmware for Intel security issue.
> Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (M10H.CAP) using BIOSRenamer


Thanks for the update. While security updates may slow down the system, as spectrum & meltdown, those are kind of necessary. The stability updates are welcome. Hopefully there are no bugs. Did you try it?


----------



## SpeedyIV

DarthFK said:


> Thanks for the update. While security updates may slow down the system, as spectrum & meltdown, those are kind of necessary. The stability updates are welcome. Hopefully there are no bugs. Did you try it?


Have not tried it (stuck at work). I did find an updated BIOS for the Max X Hero WIFI (the board I have) at the non-US Asus site. It's not posted on the US site yet.

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-HERO-WI-FI-AC/HelpDesk_BIOS/

Version 2203
2019/10/1710.39 MBytes
ROG MAXIMUS X HERO (WI-FI AC) BIOS 2203
1) Support Intel upcoming CPU
2) Improved system stability and performance
3) Update RAID driver to rev. 17.5
4) Support Intel Optane Memory H10 device
5) Update ME firmware for Intel security issue.
Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (M10HWIFI.CAP) using BIOSRenamer


----------



## DarthFK

Thanks! Same board here, just installed a few days ago with a 9700k. I do/did have a bit of time and checked - this BIOS you've found is indeed absent on the US website. Well, I don't have a 10th gen CPU, but I might give it a try 

Thank you. That confirmats that z370 boards will still support 10th gen (the 4th skylake upgrade ) without a new chipset, probly.


----------



## GeneO

DarthFK said:


> Thank you. That confirmats that z370 boards will still support 10th gen (the 4th skylake upgrade ) without a new chipset, probly.


No


----------



## DarthFK

GeneO said:


> DarthFK said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you. That confirmats that z370 boards will still support 10th gen (the 4th skylake upgrade/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif ) without a new chipset, probly.
> 
> 
> 
> No
Click to expand...

LOL

Edit: this actually means that I agree that they will, as per their usual practice, issue a new chipset It wouldn't be intel if they didn't, with all the z170-z270-z370-z390 debate, pros and cons of it. Just making a bit of fun


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Hey I've got a quick question.

Can I used the Dimm.2 card from my old Z370 Apex in the z390 Apex, I'm wanting to use a Nvme drive that has a pre attached heatsink.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

schoolofmonkey said:


> Hey I've got a quick question.
> 
> Can I used the Dimm.2 card from my old Z370 Apex in the z390 Apex, I'm wanting to use a Nvme drive that has a pre attached heatsink.


Yup you can.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Yup you can.


I figured as they look pretty much the same, just one has a monster heatsink, which also has no clearance with the ram next to it.


----------



## D-EJ915

You can just leave the heatsink bit off as well, it's what I did with mine.


----------



## postem

Friends I'm waiting 9900ks to be delivered the Asus hero x z370 is already compatible with it?
Should I be worried or will I be able to sustain 5ghz without issues?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

postem said:


> Friends I'm waiting 9900ks to be delivered the Asus hero x z370 is already compatible with it?
> Should I be worried or will I be able to sustain 5ghz without issues?



It’s compatible. Don’t worry. As to 5ghz, that’s up to the chip not board.


----------



## DarthFK

postem said:


> Friends I'm waiting 9900ks to be delivered the Asus hero x z370 is already compatible with it?
> Should I be worried or will I be able to sustain 5ghz without issues?


The BIOS ensures "compatibility". Just save your current settings on a USB, if you want that, then update the mobo to the latest version. If you alreadysold your CPU, you can do a BIOS update without the CPU (mobo + PSU only - are enough) via BIOS-flashback with a FAT32 formatted USB in the dedicated slot. Go to your motherboard website, support, drivers, bios and you know the rest. For how-to BIOS-flashback consult the MB manual, if necessary.


----------



## KCDC

Howdy, putting a friends build together with a 9900k, TridentZ 3200 and a XI Hero, air cooled Noctua D15. I don't plan to OC heavily in favor of stability. Probably 4.9/1.35v adaptive, hopefully lower voltage. Plenty of info for me out there, however I don't want to miss anything like I did with my BW-E build way back when with Asus X99 Strix ramping some voltages (I think it was SA) on auto settings, bricking my first 6900k. This was the most plausible speculation at least. I plan to leave most things on auto if they are safe to leave it as such but if there are any specific voltages I should clamp, I'd like to know. Thank ya!


----------



## chibi

KCDC said:


> Howdy, putting a friends build together with a 9900k, TridentZ 3200 and a XI Hero, air cooled Noctua D15. I don't plan to OC heavily in favor of stability. Probably 4.9/1.35v adaptive, hopefully lower voltage. Plenty of info for me out there, however I don't want to miss anything like I did with my BW-E build way back when with Asus X99 Strix ramping some voltages (I think it was SA) on auto settings, bricking my first 6900k. This was the most plausible speculation at least. I plan to leave most things on auto if they are safe to leave it as such but if there are any specific voltages I should clamp, I'd like to know. Thank ya!



9900K at 4.9 I would dial in the voltages manually to set it and forget it. Punching in XMP even at 3200 will likely send your io/sa auto voltages into the 1.35 range or higher.

vcore 1.25 ~ 1.30 -> start at .25 and work up in .005 increments.
vccio 1.05 ~ 1.10
vccsa 1.05 ~ 1.15


----------



## KCDC

chibi said:


> 9900K at 4.9 I would dial in the voltages manually to set it and forget it. Punching in XMP even at 3200 will likely send your io/sa auto voltages into the 1.35 range or higher.
> 
> vcore 1.25 ~ 1.30 -> start at .25 and work up in .005 increments.
> vccio 1.05 ~ 1.10
> vccsa 1.05 ~ 1.15


Cool, thanks! Repped


----------



## postem

chibi said:


> 9900K at 4.9 I would dial in the voltages manually to set it and forget it. Punching in XMP even at 3200 will likely send your io/sa auto voltages into the 1.35 range or higher.
> 
> vcore 1.25 ~ 1.30 -> start at .25 and work up in .005 increments.
> vccio 1.05 ~ 1.10
> vccsa 1.05 ~ 1.15


So low vccio/sa? I remember my 8700k was bsoding all the time until I ramped up to 1.8v for 3600 gskill 16-16-16 on 44x cache. This is due a weak memory controller?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

^^

1.8v is instant death. You are mistaken perhaps? 

Cpu board and ram all play a big part in ram overclocking. One weak link can cause issues like needing more io/sa.


----------



## chibi

postem said:


> So low vccio/sa? I remember my 8700k was bsoding all the time until I ramped up to 1.8v for 3600 gskill 16-16-16 on 44x cache. This is due a weak memory controller?





MrTOOSHORT said:


> ^^
> 
> 1.8v is instant death. You are mistaken perhaps?
> 
> Cpu board and ram all play a big part in ram overclocking. One weak link can cause issues like needing more io/sa.



1.8v is _yikes_ territory. 3600 on coffee lake should be a walk in the park imo. I would list your complete hardware specs and start from scratch. Click the spoiler for a basic guide, forgot where I sourced it from but it's a good starting point for memory OC provided your hardware config is capable.



Spoiler



Intel Memory Overclocking Quick Reference

Quick Gains:

Raise frequency, but not to the detriment of CL. Target a frequency/CL combination that makes sense for both transfer rate and latency.
Lower CL (drives RTLs lower), and set tRCD/tRP accordingly.
Lower CR if possible (drives RTLs lower), but not to the detriment of other timings.
Lower tRFC.
Lower tFAW (and tRRD_S with it, see below).
Raise tREFI.
Then work on the other timings. Tight 2nd/3rd timings can have meaningful results.

Voltages:


DRAM Voltage (VDIMM): 1.20 - 1.45V. Some XMP kits go up to 1.50V. Above this is at your own risk.
VCCIO/VCCSA: Use this table as a starting point. (Source)

Timings and "Rules":

Primary Timings:

CL: Start with a safe frequency/CL combination and adjust from there.
tRCD/tRP: Try 0-2 above CL (Samsung B-die) or 1-5 above CL (other ICs).
tRAS: CL + tRCD + tRTP (Source) or CL + tRCD + 2 (Source and Diagram). Min: 28. (Source: ASRock UEFI description)
CR: Try 1, otherwise leave at 2.

Secondary Timings:

tWR: Leave on Auto and control by tWRPRE until desired value reached. Manually set after that. (Raja: 16, Try: 9-16)
tRFC: Lower as much as possible. JEDEC default for 8Gb ICs: 0.350*XXXX/2 for DDR4-XXXX. (Raja: 350-360, Try: <=default)
tRRD_L: Min spacing is 6. (Raja: 6, Try: 6-8)
tRRD_S: Min spacing is 4. (Raja: 4, Try: 4-6)
tWTR: Min spacing is possibly 4. (Raja: 4, Try: 1-4)
tWTR_L: Leave on Auto and control by tWRRD_sg until desired value reached. Manually set after that. (Raja: 8, Try: 6-8)
tWTR_S: Leave on Auto and control by tWRRD_dg until desired value reached. Manually set after that. (Raja: 6, Try: 1-6)
tRTP: Min spacing is supposed to be 4, but this seems to actually be 6 with modern systems due to memory densities. (Raja: 8, Try: 6-8)
tFAW: Min is 4*tRRD_S. (Raja: 16-24, Try: 16-28)
tCWL/tWL: Set to 0-3 lower than CL. (Raja: tCWL = CL, Try: 9-16)

Third Timings:

tREFI: Raise as much as possible. JEDEC default: 7.8*XXXX/2 for DDR4-XXXX. (Raja: 11400-16667, Try: default, 2*default, or max it out)
tCKE: JEDEC sets this to 5-7. (Raja: 6-7, Try: Auto or 6-7)
For all the remaining third timings, I just start with Raja's values and adjust from there. Remember that tWTR_L/tWTR_S are controlled by tWRRD_sg/tWRRD_dg. Raja's values (and ranges to try in parenthesis):

tRDRD_sg: 6 (6-7)
tRDRD_dg: 4 (4)
tRDRD_dr: 6 (5-6)
tRDRD_dd: 6 (5-6)
tRDWR_sg: 15 (12-16)
tRDWR_dg: 15 (12-16)
tRDWR_dr: 16 (12-16)
tRDWR_dd: 16 (12-16)
tWRRD_sg: 35 (<35) (drives tWTR_L)
tWRRD_dg: 29-35 (<35) (drives tWTR_S)
tWRRD_dr: 8 (5-8)
tWRRD_dd: 8 (5-8)
tWRWR_sg: 6 (6-7)
tWRWR_dg: 4 (4)
tWRWR_dr: 8 (5-8)
tWRWR_dd: 8 (5-8)

Misc. Timings:

tWRPRE: 4 + tWR + tCWL. Min: 23, Max: 96. (Source) (Raja: 31)
tRC: tRAS + tRP. (only on some UEFIs, e.g. Gigabyte)

General:
Another trick is to see what the default/JEDEC timings are for DDR4-2133/DDR4-2400/DDR4-2666/etc. by setting everything to Auto (except frequency) and taking some notes. Many of the values end up being the same as the above and it gives insight to what can be adjusted further.

RTLs/IOLs:
RTLs/IOLs should align on their own, if not it's a training issue. If VDIMM/VCCIO/VCCSA adjustments don't help, you can also try the following, in order, one at a time:

Manually set IOL Offsets, then save and reboot and inspect RTLs/IOLs
Manually set IOLs, then save and reboot and inspect RTLs
Manually set RTLs, and hope the system still boots
Remember, if you change memory frequency, CL, or CR, the RTLs change so you'd have to start these steps over from Auto.


----------



## postem

MrTOOSHORT said:


> ^^
> 
> 1.8v is instant death. You are mistaken perhaps?
> 
> Cpu board and ram all play a big part in ram overclocking. One weak link can cause issues like needing more io/sa.


Sorry mismatch.
1.18 - 1.2 v.

Even on Asus bios I set 1.18 and it ramp up to 1.21-1.22v by hwinfo


----------



## mattxx88

postem said:


> Friends I'm waiting 9900ks to be delivered the Asus hero x z370 is already compatible with it?
> Should I be worried or will I be able to sustain 5ghz without issues?


i putted on my Maximus X Formula my new 9900KS last friday, all fine


----------



## postem

mattxx88 said:


> i putted on my Maximus X Formula my new 9900KS last friday, all fine


Compatibility wise I don't think there will be any issues, however, I'm worried if this vrm will be enough. Your maximus formula x have vrm temps sensor and it have a better vrm with doublers.

Still, I don't plan to overclock it over 5ghz, I just want it to run at lowest vcore possible, so I could deal with temps under noctua d15.
I probably will rarely go over 150A, which is less than 50% nominal vrm capacity. On paper I think it will be all ok, but in practice I will need to test.

I should receive it today, gonna run some tests and report back. Still I'm considering getting an apex, but it is probably overkill, but Asus z390 line is like all or nothing: all boards apart from extreme, apex and Gene all have 4 100a phases.


----------



## mattxx88

i don't think you will run into troubles
i see also is a quite "cold" cpu


i am trying to get the lower v.core to close CB20, then i'll give +0.05v and see if it runs well P95 AVX. last test will be several hours playing BF5 (this game since BF3 is the best i foud to test CPU stability, it is very CPU sensitive)


----------



## KotOr

hey guys i have question. i have 9900KF + M11 apex and i overclock it to 5Ghz all cores with LLC6 adaptiv 1.3V, offset -0.080V, Max 1.23V, AVX load 1.185V ,NonAVX 1.2V 88c test with cinebench r15 and aida64 . And my question is about LLC. On lots of forums i read that is recommended use of LLC 5 . but i found review that shows LLC 6 is still Vdroop and LLC 7 is overshoot. so why everybody recommend LLC 5 and should i change my settings? thank you


----------



## Falkentyne

KotOr said:


> hey guys i have question. i have 9900KF + M11 apex and i overclock it to 5Ghz all cores with LLC6 adaptiv 1.3V, offset -0.080V, Max 1.23V, AVX load 1.185V ,NonAVX 1.2V 88c test with cinebench r15 and aida64 . And my question is about LLC. On lots of forums i read that is recommended use of LLC 5 . but i found review that shows LLC 6 is still Vdroop and LLC 7 is overshoot. so why everybody recommend LLC 5 and should i change my settings? thank you


No LLC will overshoot "RMS" voltage.
People only thought the vcore 'overshoots' on RMS just because the Super I/O sensor totally sucks.
Every LLC besides LLC 1,2 and LLC3 will overshoot via TRANSIENTS. This is NOT what you are seeing on sensors. No sensor has enough resolution or update speed to see transient spikes or dips. That's why you need an oscilloscope. 
Even multimeters that cost less than $1,000 can't pick up microsecond voltage swings.

https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/


----------



## KotOr

so it's wise to lower LLC then? and do new stability testing ? thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

KotOr said:


> so it's wise to lower LLC then? and do new stability testing ? thanks


----------



## postem

Falkentyne said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quinVptkJqM


As I understand there are conflicting views. I saw the video yesterday, buildzoid basically advises to go full LLC, or higher you can (consider anyway he is always doing extreme overclock), while elmor seen to be telling going higher LLC values mean overshoot that could be an issue.

I think both proposals need to be analized in lieu of what kind of vcore you are dealing with. On the video buildzoid sometime mention he doesn't even consider 1.4v safe for long use, so do I, even considering Intel guideline of 1.5v max, anything over 1.35 will probably induce some degradation.

The reason buildzoid tells to use a higher LLC is that he thinks or at least I understood on video, it's better to use a higher LLC to achieve less undershoot under load than to use a higher vcore, but consider that if you are running conservative values like 1.2, 1.3 vcore, either way, the worse would be a higher LLC, due to overshoot. If with a median LLC you can manage to run stable at sane vcore, it would be the better approach.


----------



## Falkentyne

postem said:


> As I understand there are conflicting views. I saw the video yesterday, buildzoid basically advises to go full LLC, or higher you can (consider anyway he is always doing extreme overclock), while elmor seen to be telling going higher LLC values mean overshoot that could be an issue.
> 
> I think both proposals need to be analized in lieu of what kind of vcore you are dealing with. On the video buildzoid sometime mention he doesn't even consider 1.4v safe for long use, so do I, even considering Intel guideline of 1.5v max, anything over 1.35 will probably induce some degradation.
> 
> The reason buildzoid tells to use a higher LLC is that he thinks or at least I understood on video, it's better to use a higher LLC to achieve less undershoot under load than to use a higher vcore, but consider that if you are running conservative values like 1.2, 1.3 vcore, either way, the worse would be a higher LLC, due to overshoot. If with a median LLC you can manage to run stable at sane vcore, it would be the better approach.


That's not what buildzoid said at all.

He said that going past LLC5 on the Asus board isn't recommended because the peak to peak increases more going from 5 to 6 than 4 to 5, and 7 and 8 aren't worth it at all.
He also specifically said that it was the 'minimum' which determines your stable voltage, and he said that the minimum doesn't decrease as much as the maximum increases.
He also said that the undershoot (transient dip) gets worse the higher the LLC you use, but not as severe as the transient overshoot increases.

He also compared to the eVGA Dark, where the transients on the Dark remained splendid up to the -75% vdroop level, which was the point he recommended using there and not going up to -90% vdroop.

Here might be a more to the point video.






Here you can see the IX Gene (same power delivery as the Extreme; the Apex is better than both but he doesn't have an Apex) that the difference between "Minimum" to "average" increases more at LLC6 vs LLC5, and the average to max increases even more, so he recommends 5 as the best option.  It was 40mv on LLC5 (minimum to average) and 60mv on LLC6 min to average). Notice that going to LLC7 and LLC8 simply made the average to minimum even larger? 80mv on LLC7 and 90mv on LLC8.

The Gigabyte Master was similar E.g. the Master had -40mv on LLC High (from average to minimum) but -60mv average to minimum on LLC Turbo, which means LLC High would have a lower drop from average to minimum (20mv improvement).


----------



## postem

Falkentyne said:


> That's not what buildzoid said at all.
> 
> He said that going past LLC5 on the Asus board isn't recommended because the peak to peak increases more going from 5 to 6 than 4 to 5, and 7 and 8 aren't worth it at all.
> He also specifically said that it was the 'minimum' which determines your stable voltage, and he said that the minimum doesn't decrease as much as the maximum increases.
> He also said that the undershoot (transient dip) gets worse the higher the LLC you use, but not as severe as the transient overshoot increases.
> 
> He also compared to the eVGA Dark, where the transients on the Dark remained splendid up to the -75% vdroop level, which was the point he recommended using there and not going up to -90% vdroop.
> 
> Here might be a more to the point video.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEr8-4aBtCU
> 
> Here you can see the IX Gene (same power delivery as the Extreme; the Apex is better than both but he doesn't have an Apex) that the difference between "Minimum" to "average" increases more at LLC6 vs LLC5, and the average to max increases even more, so he recommends 5 as the best option. It was 40mv on LLC5 (minimum to average) and 60mv on LLC6 min to average). Notice that going to LLC7 and LLC8 simply made the average to minimum even larger? 80mv on LLC7 and 90mv on LLC8.
> 
> The Gigabyte Master was similar E.g. the Master had -40mv on LLC High (from average to minimum) but -60mv average to minimum on LLC Turbo, which means LLC High would have a lower drop from average to minimum (20mv improvement).


Thanks as I said my comprehension on subject is meager so I got it wrong.

Now about the benefits of having a more stable vcore across loads, and the fact the benefits lessen the higher you go, what are the issues we risk with having overshoot voltage, it's the risk of constantly going over what is safe voltage and getting more degradation?

Also another question, the overshoot is the same regardless of vcore set or it's a function of the actual value dialed in bios?


----------



## Falkentyne

postem said:


> Thanks as I said my comprehension on subject is meager so I got it wrong.
> 
> Now about the benefits of having a more stable vcore across loads, and the fact the benefits lessen the higher you go, what are the issues we risk with having overshoot voltage, it's the risk of constantly going over what is safe voltage and getting more degradation?
> 
> Also another question, the overshoot is the same regardless of vcore set or it's a function of the actual value dialed in bios?


Overshoot is difficult to explain and it requires a background in Electronics to really understand, but it has to do with capacitors (voltage charging and discharging) not being able to react to sudden current loads changing, which is very hard to explain here.

I'm not fully sure if this is an accurate explanation but you can read this.
https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/load-line_calibration

There was another page which went into FAR more detail about this, explaining it has to do with a "gate" opening and closing a connection, and a capacitor discharging the stored +12v by a certain amount (how much the +12v is modulated downwards and released determines the VRM's input voltage), or how much is discharged, but as you can see, this gets over the head of most people VERY FAST.

The overshoot voltage isn't a big problem because when the overshoot (transient spike) happens, there is barely any current going into the CPU. It happens during a "load release", not during a sustained load.
The issue is if the overshoot gets REALLY high, like something like past 1.65v (this point is unknown) despite lack of current. Because at a certain point, you can just blow through the oxide layer gates, destroying the CPU.

The main issue with a higher LLC is the *higher* sustained voltage. At higher current (amps), this can leapfrog past Intel's safe amps/voltage electrical calibration and slowly degrade processors.
For example, I calculated (if the Intel specification sheets are to be believed) what the maximum safe (on-die sense) measured voltage should be at different loads--this is measured directly from the CPU die, and thus unaffected by "power plane" voltage rise like you saw in Buildzoid's video---the difference between "on-die sense voltage" and "Average voltage from Probinator" probe.

For 9900k:

193 amps: 1.213v
150 amps: 1.280v
125 amps: 1.320v
100 amps: 1.360v
75 amps: 1.40v
50 amps: 1.440v

etc etc...
0 amps (no clock signal sent to processor): 1.520v.

All these values are based on a default Intel specified loadline being used (equal to "LLC2" on your Asus board, or LLC=Standard / Normal on Gigabyte Z390 boards), which is exactly 1.6 mOhms (milliohms) of loadline calibration.
You can calculate the math without even understanding a single thing I said just by using Ohm's law:

Convert volts to millivolts (to match same units as milliohms).
1.520-1520 mv

Vdroop is Amps * resistance (ohm's law), just like watts=amps * volts.
So if you start at 1.520v and plug in the amps, you get:
1520 - ( 193 * 1.6) = 1213 mv
1520 - (150 * 1.6) = 1280mv

And so on. This is self explanatory.

This is based on maximum vdroop of course.

Using "Auto" Vcore makes things complicated because while you're "supposed" to NOT use loadline calibration (keep it at intel spec) on auto voltage, the AC Loadline mOhms value is supposed to help counter the super high vdroop by boosting the CPU's input voltage to the VRM (before vdroop is processed). This has nothing to do with loadline calibration's mOhms by the way.

Ok, so what about loadline calibration on fixed voltage?

Well the settings above are based on "absolute maximum", which is if you used a BIOS voltage of 1.520v with LLC2 (AND NO HIGHER), which would run BOTH your idle voltages and your load voltages at the edge of what Intel specifies as safe. I dont think anyone wants to do that even if your processor wouldn't degrade.

Well, by using a stronger LLC, you reduce the vdroop (lowering the mOhms) for loadline calibration, which then throws off the entire volts/amps voltage curve for what is a safe LOAD voltage.
Take this example here.


1.340v BIOS set = LLC6 = 0.4 mOhms of VRM Loadline (loadline calibration). Instead of 1.520v, we now use a starting value of 1340mv. Let's do some math.

Is 100 amps safe here?
1340 - (100 * 0.4) = 1300mv

(Cross reference the Intel spec):
1520 - (100 * 1.6) = 1360mv --- 1300 < 1360 = YES YOU'RE SAFE.


Is 150 amps safe here?

1340 - ( 150 * 0.4 ) = 1280mv.

(Cross reference the intel spec):
1520 - (150 * 1.6) = 1280mv ---1280 = 1280= YES YOU'RE SAFE.

Is 193 amps safe here??
1340 - (193 * 0.4) = 1262mv

(Cross reference the Intel spec):
1520 - (193 * 1.6) = 1213mv --1262 greater than 1213 <--NOPE you're not -you're 50mv too high!

So you can see how changing the loadline calibration causes you to have to think about how much load voltage / amps you're putting into your CPU.

And the second issue as we already talked about, is the "sustained to transient -drop-" increasing at higher LLC, since it's the lowest voltage the processor will see that determines if you get "random" instability or not. And unlike "load release" spikes. the "Load activate" dips actually happen at heavy current, so you can get 'random instability if it goes too low.

The main benefit from a lower LLC is thus, a lower "average to minimum" dip. But at the cost of higher vdroop.


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ Great post!! 



the thing about overshoot (and under shoot), or more accurately, load-transition spikes, is that they occur on the microsec time scale. Intel's spec for virus mode V_ovs is ~ 200mV (eg, p95 -like load) at stock voltage. V_ovs spikes will cause erosion over time. For a gaming rig, it is a good idea to have some droop on the subject rail (115x socket = vcore, x99, x299 = vccin). BUt the susceptibility really varies by the product line.


----------



## mattxx88

i have some issue with my mainboard (Maximus X Formula), regarding RAM settings

i bought a new viper steel 4400 cas19 kit, and few 9900ks to test them.
I did a cmos, then installed kit. then applied xmp settings with all other stuffs @def = NO BOOT

then i tried again, CMOS, all settings @def (yes also ram) i only raised up vdimm 1.45v, vccio 1.200v, vccsa 1225v to see what speed and timing my board assign automatically

the resault was: 3600mhz 14-14-14-33

seems like mainboard automatically gives too extreme settings, thats why i cannot boot @4400mhz

last try i did was to load my oc profile with a ram speed settings @4000mhz cas17. with this profile i could reach 4000mhz cas 16-16-16-32 with new ram, but nothig over.
is there any settings on Asus to make the board load with more "relaxed" timings automatically?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Ok, so what works out better, AVX offset or Power limit overclocking.

I was using power limit, for my 5Ghz, but there was a downside of when doing a x265 encode it would still downclock like prime95, occt small data set and Linx 0.95/

Just did a BIOS update, so I'm about to start dialing in a new OC on the 9900k/Apex XI.

I really need to get this custom loop sorted soon.


----------



## Jpmboy

schoolofmonkey said:


> Ok, so what works out better, AVX offset or Power limit overclocking.
> 
> I was using power limit, for my 5Ghz, but there was a downside of when doing a x265 encode it would still downclock like prime95, occt small data set and Linx 0.95/
> 
> Just did a BIOS update, so I'm about to start dialing in a new OC on the 9900k/Apex XI.
> 
> *I really need to get this custom loop sorted soon*.


If I'm not mistaken, the Power limit method will "******" or fail some loads where an AVX offset would not. But for a mostly gaming rig, I'd go with PL-OC since very few (if any?) games have sustained AVX loads... I guess it all depends on the use case?


----------



## postem

Thanks Falkentyne, great post.
Even being a computer engineer I never got much in detail in the electronic details. Gonna keep studying more.


----------



## postem

Jpmboy said:


> If I'm not mistaken, the Power limit method will "******" or fail some loads where an AVX offset would not. But for a mostly gaming rig, I'd go with PL-OC since very few (if any?) games have sustained AVX loads... I guess it all depends on the use case?


I gonna check today what loads bf gives me on 9900ks, but so far the only game that consistently give me a hard load is bf1/v. Under 144hz+ it hammer all cores and give me a consistent watt load similar to p95 26.

Several compilers are avx aware but you need to actually use vectors for it. Even .net has instructions for it. 
Personally I don't bother with avx with games only, even if some game would use it usage would be minimal and not even remotely close to handbrake or even p95 that keeps calling avx on all cores and all threads every second.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

The reason I even botheref updating my bios and resetting the overclock was I kept getting hangs/lock in Red Dead Redemption 2, first though my oc was unstable.
Even had be second guessing my ram, but after 2 full memory test there, they ate fine too.
Turns out its just a unoptimized pile of rubbish at the moment, so I have to dial the oc in again.

Previously was just using power limits, though I did find a avx offset to run cooler, now we're hitting 35 - 40c days in Australia I need to watch the heat, got AC though.

Current I've been just running xmp stock all Auto, yeah it feels so odd, makes you feel dirty...lol


----------



## Falkentyne

postem said:


> I gonna check today what loads bf gives me on 9900ks, but so far the only game that consistently give me a hard load is bf1/v. Under 144hz+ it hammer all cores and give me a consistent watt load similar to p95 26.
> 
> Several compilers are avx aware but you need to actually use vectors for it. Even .net has instructions for it.
> Personally I don't bother with avx with games only, even if some game would use it usage would be minimal and not even remotely close to handbrake or even p95 that keeps calling avx on all cores and all threads every second.


I've only seen this watt load in BF5 on the main menu/loading, when you launch the game. Not once the map loads. 100% all cores load. Not sure what it's doing.


----------



## chibi

postem said:


> but so far the only game that consistently give me a *hard load* is bf1/v.



I know of a few other games with my honey buns that achieve the same effect.


----------



## DarthFK

schoolofmonkey said:


> The reason I even botheref updating my bios and resetting the overclock was I kept getting hangs/lock in Red Dead Redemption 2, first though my oc was unstable.
> Even had be second guessing my ram, but after 2 full memory test there, they ate fine too.
> Turns out its just a unoptimized pile of rubbish at the moment, so I have to dial the oc in again.
> 
> Previously was just using power limits, though I did find a avx offset to run cooler, now we're hitting 35 - 40c days in Australia I need to watch the heat, got AC though.
> 
> Current I've been just running xmp stock all Auto, yeah it feels so odd, makes you feel dirty...lol



Yep...

"Red Dead Redemption 2 Stuttering, Hyperthreading, & Async Compute on PC"


----------



## schoolofmonkey

So what's the consensus on manual voltage for 24/7 on the 9900k.

Pretty much dialed in my 5Ghz all core with a manual voltage of 1.35v using LLC5, I did have to use a little Power Limit limiter, PL1=200, PL2=220, duration 30 seconds, it only downclocks under Linx 0.95, Prime95 small fft and OCCT Small data set, everything runs at the full 5Ghz, temps are hitting 85c max.

Problem is the moment I go to use Adaptive voltage it introduces instability and I have to up the voltages.


----------



## chibi

I have the Apex XI and 9900KS sitting and will be building shortly, do I need to download and install the VGA drivers from the ASUS support site?

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-XI-APEX/HelpDesk_Download/


----------



## DarthFK

chibi said:


> I have the Apex XI and 9900KS sitting and will be building shortly, do I need to download and install the VGA drivers from the ASUS support site?
> 
> https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-XI-APEX/HelpDesk_Download/


No. Those are for integrated graphics only (assuming that you have a dedicated GPU)

P.S. so, install Chipset, audio, LAN, SATA, wireless, Bluetooth. I usually download the INF driver (inf chipset utility) directly from intel,l first, install it and reboot, then old school install other drivers (chipset/mei) and reboot after each driver i stall, from sata, to then Audio (after Audio you must reboot), then lan, etc.


----------



## chibi

DarthFK said:


> No. Those are for integrated graphics only (assuming that you have a dedicated GPU)
> 
> P.S. so, install Chipset, audio, LAN, SATA, wireless, Bluetooth. I usually download the INF driver (inf chipset utility) directly from intel,l first, install it and reboot, then old school install other drivers (chipset/mei) and reboot after each driver i stall, from sata, to then Audio (after Audio you must reboot), then lan, etc.



Thanks! The Apex XI does not have onboard VGA output so I assumed the driver is useless. I will have to rely on a dedicated GPU for video output. 

Would the VGA driver be intended for applications that would use the iGPU such as Quicksync? Just wondering if I should install it just in case.

I currently have the following folders in my installation USB to prep for the fresh install:

AURA
Chipset
LAN
SATA
*VGA

BT, WiFi and Audio are not needed so I will disable those features in the BIOS, as well as the Armoury Crate.

* May not install if completely not needed.


----------



## DarthFK

chibi said:


> DarthFK said:
> 
> 
> 
> No. Those are for integrated graphics only (assuming that you have a dedicated GPU)
> 
> P.S. so, install Chipset, audio, LAN, SATA, wireless, Bluetooth. I usually download the INF driver (inf chipset utility) directly from intel,l first, install it and reboot, then old school install other drivers (chipset/mei) and reboot after each driver i stall, from sata, to then Audio (after Audio you must reboot), then lan, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! The Apex XI does not have onboard VGA output so I assumed the driver is useless. I will have to rely on a dedicated GPU for video output.
> 
> Would the VGA driver be intended for applications that would use the iGPU such as Quicksync? Just wondering if I should install it just in case.
> 
> I currently have the following folders in my installation USB to prep for the fresh install:
> 
> AURA
> Chipset
> LAN
> SATA
> *VGA
> 
> BT, WiFi and Audio are not needed so I will disable those features in the BIOS, as well as the Armoury Crate.
> 
> * May not install if completely not needed.
Click to expand...

I don't know about quicksync, but usually when you install a discrete GPU the VGA driver would not install, it refuses to do so w a discrete GPU (and if Apex doesn't have a dedicated iGPU output, then you won't install it before inserting the GPU).

I don't know what you'd use the Quicksync for, since you have hardware acceleration on GPUs, but if it's a must, read this:
https://mirillis.com/intel-quick-sync-setup-action-tutorial

Before(!) doing this, let us know why do you need Quicksync. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable in the video "department" might give you an advice if you really need it at all.


----------



## DarthFK

I am not a specialist on encoding (including Quicksync and nvenc) and all that stuff, but I found this video below. If someone more qualified is here, please jump in:

https://youtu.be/1PqOInmAlIo


----------



## chibi

DarthFK said:


> I am not a specialist on encoding (including Quicksync and nvenc) and all that stuff, but I found this video below. If someone more qualified is here, please jump in:
> 
> https://youtu.be/1PqOInmAlIo



I wouldn't worry about it, my Quicksync use case is more towards streaming game play. If I go with a 2080 Ti, then Quicksync is negated with Nvidia NVENC as it's quite powerful on the Turing GPUs.

I was just curious why they listed VGA drivers for a board with no onboard GPU output is all. If a user goes with the Apex XI + 9900KF combo then that driver is absolutely useless.


----------



## DarthFK

chibi said:


> DarthFK said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am not a specialist on encoding (including Quicksync and nvenc) and all that stuff, but I found this video below. If someone more qualified is here, please jump in:
> 
> https://youtu.be/1PqOInmAlIo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't worry about it, my Quicksync use case is more towards streaming game play. If I go with a 2080 Ti, then Quicksync is negated with Nvidia NVENC as it's quite powerful on the Turing GPUs.
> 
> I was just curious why they listed VGA drivers for a board with no onboard GPU output is all. If a user goes with the Apex XI + 9900KF combo then that driver is absolutely useless.
Click to expand...

I see. Yes, that's right for kf, though you can still enable & "use" QSV apparently for encoding on iGpu capable CPUs - though I am not sure how the VGA drivers would install (before nvidia/amd drivers? Not sure). Indeed it's a bit weird.


----------



## DarthFK

Another two separate updates from me, related to Asus support and danger of ebay:

1. In fact the 1st is related to eBay/board - if you remember I have earlier reported receiving, under Asus CEO's office supervision, a replacement Asus z390-E board from RMA, brand new. Since this took Asus "only" almost two months, I bought a Maximus Hero X z370 and had to swll the z390-e, on ebay. It was brand spanking new with perfect pins and all untouched (I took pictures of course and used thhe CPU protective cap on the socket) - well, the buyer attempted to claim "previously" bent pins on the 30th day from purchase!!! I have no doubt that he bent the pins and tried to scam me. This board was truly "cursed" ffs. 

2. Asus support schemes and ebay scammers - I did buy another Asus board on ebay and I did realize that it doesn't work too late. The seller also showed on serial on the box, but the board turned out to be with a different serial number... I got scammed of course. What a karma! And... I sent it to Asus with that explanation. The board had zero visible damage whatsover. Perfect pins, no blown caps, nothing. I inspected it super thoroughly. Asus said it's barely within warranty & accepted it, but...(!) the tech support again wrote that standard cryptic reply "pay or else" due to "Out of Warranty or Customer Induced Damage". No explanation, nothing! I previously wrote to them in the RMA form that I haven't used the board one single day. They wrote that I will receive a quote, however, today the RMA already reverted back to showing "in repair" again. Not sure what will actually follow. I truly hope that they can help me again, but their lower level support gives me a lot of emotions. Hope I will not have to address the CEO office again with a kind request or complaint. But this is the 2nd time when there is no visible damage and they still try to claim it, in order to make the owner pay (while the owner was played by everyone else). Though this time I don't know if even they CEO's office can help. (My current mb is bought from ebay, but the incidence of scammers there is super high.)


----------



## Jpmboy

It is hard to understand why you keep buying boards off ebay, get damaged goods and then expect ASUS to repair these under warranty. In the US, and NA, you need the original purchase invoice, warranty card and the warranty is only valid for New items purchased from an Authorized ASUS product reseller. Frankly, it is the kind of antics you are trying to pull off that makes legit warranty claims subject to more suspicion. Talk about "scammers".


Probably best to stop exposing your antics on this thread. Just some advice.


----------



## DarthFK

Jpmboy said:


> It is hard to understand why you keep buying boards off ebay, get damaged goods and then expect ASUS to repair these under warranty. In the US, and NA, you need the original purchase invoice, warranty card and the warranty is only valid for New items purchased from an Authorized ASUS product reseller. Frankly, it is the kind of antics you are trying to pull off that makes legit warranty claims subject to more suspicion. Talk about "scammers".
> 
> 
> Probably best to stop exposing your antics on this thread. Just some advice.


Well, yes and no. The first board I bought was new open box, so it wasn't purchased as bad. And I didn't kill it either. Yes, it seems counterintuitive to purchase cheaper from ebay. Yet, the 2nd board was so dirt cheap (for a reason) that it was a probable loss from get go, and therefore it was purchased for a sheer experiment with it, which didn't work due to it being dead & it kind of automatically switched to become a test with Asus - repeatable, verifiable results with their service. Don't get me wrong, despite what may seem, I didn't & don't expect(ed) it to work or being fixed, but another user ebay or not might expect a service under warranty. So, for such and other cases, it might be good for anyone to know if this is an Asus practice to attempt to "play" the owner and whom should they address:
- 1st RMA, 
- then tech support with proof of their claim (see what their finance says)
- and at the 1st sign of clear unfair play - customer induced damage (claiming pins on a no-bent pins boards etc, etc - the sender should take pictures of the board!!! as Asus asks for them) in case of a clean & no blown caps etc board) - the CEOs office. 

Not that the board circuitry couldn't be damaged otherwise, but the possible causes under warranty are limited.

Otherwise, I am in NY and didn't need any proof of purchase for RMA at all. Only the SN number on the board itself. Good to keep that in mind too.


----------



## mattxx88

in your overclock do you keep SVID enabled or disabled guys?


----------



## DarthFK

mattxx88 said:


> in your overclock do you keep SVID enabled or disabled guys?


For my constant 5Ghz (9700k, 2avx) with constant 1.28vcore, yes, SVID disabled. MB Asus Maximus X Hero WiFi.


----------



## Jpmboy

mattxx88 said:


> in your overclock do you keep SVID enabled or disabled guys?


that depends on whether you are using a fixed vcore or adaptive/offset. You can disable it for manual/fixed and enable it with adaptive/offset... the bios "rules" when set to Auto will do the same on x370/390. What is affected is power readings by some OS-based tools.


----------



## Jpmboy

DarthFK said:


> Well, yes and no. The first board I bought was new open box, so it wasn't purchased as bad. And I didn't kill it either. Yes, it seems counterintuitive to purchase cheaper from ebay. Yet, the 2nd board was so dirt cheap (for a reason) that it was a probable loss from get go, and therefore it was purchased for a sheer experiment with it, which didn't work due to it being dead & it kind of automatically switched to become a test with Asus - repeatable, verifiable results with their service. Don't get me wrong, despite what may seem, I didn't & don't expect(ed) it to work or being fixed, but another user ebay or not might expect a service under warranty. So, for such and other cases, it might be good for anyone to know if this is an Asus practice to attempt to "play" the owner and whom should they address:
> - 1st RMA,
> - then tech support with proof of their claim (see what their finance says)
> - and at the 1st sign of clear unfair play - customer induced damage (claiming pins on a no-bent pins boards etc, etc - the sender should take pictures of the board!!! as Asus asks for them) in case of a clean & no blown caps etc board) - the CEOs office.
> 
> Not that the board circuitry couldn't be damaged otherwise, but the possible causes under warranty are limited.
> 
> Otherwise, I am in NY and didn't need any proof of purchase for RMA at all. Only the SN number on the board itself. Good to keep that in mind too.


 Like I said: https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-E-GAMING/HelpDesk_Warranty/


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> that depends on whether you are using a fixed vcore or adaptive/offset. You can disable it for manual/fixed and enable it with adaptive/offset... the bios "rules" when set to Auto will do the same on x370/390. What is affected is power readings by some OS-based tools.


On Gigabyte Z390 what BIOS settings do you need for SVID enabled. I tried it with IA AC Loadline 140 and before it greyed out Normal +0.000 and instant BSOD on boot and when I went into the BIOS CPU voltage was at 1.21v. 

Never mind, figured it out. Vcore on Auto, SVID Enabled, IA AC Loadline 140. This gives me 1.32v in Prime95 1344 FFTs, too high for my 5GHZ, but if I lower IA AC Loadline to even 130 I get BSODs on boot.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> On Gigabyte Z390 what BIOS settings do you need for SVID enabled. I tried it with IA AC Loadline 140 and before it greyed out Normal +0.000 and instant BSOD on boot and when I went into the BIOS CPU voltage was at 1.21v.
> 
> Never mind, figured it out. Vcore on Auto, SVID Enabled, IA AC Loadline 140. This gives me 1.32v in Prime95 1344 FFTs, too high for my 5GHZ, but if I lower IA AC Loadline to even 130 I get BSODs on boot.


BSOD on boot?
Disable all C-states and see if the BSOD still happens.
I have yet to determine if there is a problem with AC Loadline boosting target voltages above 1.520v when SVID is enabled, when the current draw goes up (it DOES raise it, but shenanigans seem to be happening at 5.2 ghz) or what, but to troubleshoot, go back to basics until you find the klunker that is breaking things.

Try disabling all C-states with the SVID enablled and Auto Vcore and AC LL 130 and see if it boots.
If it does, enable them one at a time until you determine what's breaking stuff.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> BSOD on boot?
> Disable all C-states and see if the BSOD still happens.
> I have yet to determine if there is a problem with AC Loadline boosting target voltages above 1.520v when SVID is enabled, when the current draw goes up (it DOES raise it, but shenanigans seem to be happening at 5.2 ghz) or what, but to troubleshoot, go back to basics until you find the klunker that is breaking things.
> 
> Try disabling all C-states with the SVID enablled and Auto Vcore and AC LL 130 and see if it boots.
> If it does, enable them one at a time until you determine what's breaking stuff.


Can boot at 120 IA AC C-States and SpeedStep and SpeedShift disabled but idle VROUT is at 1.21V and when I run Prime95 I get 1.3v. But If a lower IA AC Loadline to 100 to lower Prime95 voltage, instant BSOD on boot. I think it sets idle voltage too low.


----------



## DarthFK

Jpmboy said:


> Like I said: https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-Z370-E-GAMING/HelpDesk_Warranty/


Yes, my friend, we don't differ on warranty provisions. I am talking about the experience and perhaps some ways out of the situation for some of us.

My z390-E was "fixed" by Asus - by replacing it with a new one. Yet, the process needed monitoring and hands on. If you remember, while I had some RAM related problems, I actually bricked the BIOS while flashing it. And what did Asus say? They claimed that the remnants of some thermal paste that they saw on the board was "liquid damage" and, of course, that I should pay for that. They did not(!!!) even start board diagnostics, when they "decided" that it was "liquid damage" - by non-conductive thermal paste, cleaned with non-conductive alcohol?! Right. That's what I mean when I say that this is not exactly about warranty. 

The other board that I've sent them now, is a z170. It is within warranty (that was checked before RMA with a live Asus agent, who checked and rechecked) and has no physical damage. That doesn't mean it's not broken, of course. Still, in both the previous case (z-390e) and in this case (z170), the tech support either does not present any actual evidence of their claim of customer induced damage or, worse, comes with one that left me speechless. So, the experience till now is that they either give you nothing or something that doesn't make sense. I am going to wait and see what it'll be this time.

To put it in a sort of a comparison terms, imagine your car has a malfunction and you know what can be the cause of said malfunction (as those are limited to, say, electrics), and this checkup/repair can only be done at your car's company. You know how the car works, you know where the malfunction can be, but you don't have the tools and the equipment to fix it. Well, the mechanic calls you back, looks you in the eye and tells you "it's damaged. just damaged" If you ask him "at least tell me what it is." The answer is just "you(!) broke it". Perhaps they may indulge you with a grand statement - that, say, you poured the wrong fuel into your car, which you didn't. That's when you realize that something is really off. And the only way to sort this out, the local way here, is with a manager and arguing (and knowing what you need to say, which is what we share here as well  ) Hope you get me. 

That aside, respect, my friend, you have an excellent knowledge of the Asus boards, I must say. And I must stop staying super late night, into the mornings, and write on forums, lol   )


----------



## mattxx88

DarthFK said:


> For my constant 5Ghz (9700k, 2avx) with constant 1.28vcore, yes, SVID disabled. MB Asus Maximus X Hero WiFi.





Jpmboy said:


> that depends on whether you are using a fixed vcore or adaptive/offset. You can disable it for manual/fixed and enable it with adaptive/offset... the bios "rules" when set to Auto will do the same on x370/390. What is affected is power readings by some OS-based tools.


thanks

i'm still hesitating whether if is better fixed vcore or offset way with power saving enabled to preserve the cpu life

what do you think about? do you preffer manual, offset or adaptive way?


----------



## Jpmboy

Falkentyne said:


> BSOD on boot?
> Disable all C-states and see if the BSOD still happens.
> I have yet to determine if there is a problem with AC Loadline boosting target voltages above 1.520v when SVID is enabled, when the current draw goes up (it DOES raise it, *but shenanigans seem to be happening at 5.2 ghz)* or what, but to troubleshoot, go back to basics until you find the klunker that is breaking things.
> 
> Try disabling all C-states with the SVID enablled and Auto Vcore and AC LL 130 and see if it boots.
> If it does, enable them one at a time until you determine what's breaking stuff.


does this relate to the variance between the VID table and actual demand? On ASUS boards, select CPU "Best case scenario" - does it stil lhappen?


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> On Gigabyte Z390 what BIOS settings do you need for SVID enabled. I tried it with IA AC Loadline 140 and before it greyed out Normal +0.000 and instant BSOD on boot and when I went into the BIOS CPU voltage was at 1.21v.
> 
> Never mind, figured it out. Vcore on Auto, SVID Enabled, IA AC Loadline 140. This gives me 1.32v in Prime95 1344 FFTs, too high for my 5GHZ, but if I lower IA AC Loadline to even 130 I get BSODs on boot.


I have 2 Giga boards, but they are both x299 - one (G9) seems okay using offset, but the other G7, works best with manual override, no matter which CPU was in it. Strange.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jpmboy said:


> does this relate to the variance between the VID table and actual demand? On ASUS boards, select CPU "Best case scenario" - does it stil lhappen?


"SVID Behavior" seems to set the default values for AC and DC Loadline. I don't know if it overrides what you set in the Asus Bios, however it "seems" Asus allows VID to exceed 1.520v by default, while on Gigabyte, this can only be done by SVID OFFSET toggle. I don't even know if that setting is stable or not however.

There is another Asus specific setting called "SVID Support" which is enabled or disabled, and I don't know what that does. Apparently it allows stuff like Throttlestop 8.70 to control voltages if it's enabled. I do NOT know if that has anything to do with the 1.520v VID->VRM limit that AC loadline is supposed to be limited to without offset capability enabled (VRM command 33h).


----------



## DarthFK

mattxx88 said:


> thanks
> 
> i'm still hesitating whether if is better fixed vcore or offset way with power saving enabled to preserve the cpu life
> 
> what do you think about? do you preffer manual, offset or adaptive way?


Presumably, adaptive would allow the CPU to "drop" and cool down while not under load, hence saving it for longer. I don't remember where, but someone might have argued that, on another hand, the jumps and vdroop/overshoot from low speeds and voltages to high and too high might also be somewhat harmful to the CPU, due to the voltage spikes, hence leading me to think if LLC settings need to be adjusted even under adaptive mode. I personally do manual, as my voltages are low (1.28vcore for Prime95 under fft1344 non-AVX), and they should not degrade the CPU over the next 5-7 years. I might not keep the CPU till then, which is also a factor to account for. In fact, with these voltages it might just still be excellent even after 7 years. And at any time I have my 5GHz handy Not that I really needed, but it's a why not approach. That's why I keep it the fixed vcore & fixed 5GHz speed on at all times. 

So, a lot can depend on your actual current voltages and even m,ore on your thinking. IMO, both options are fine if voltages are good, more about what you fancy, in such a case.


----------



## DarthFK

KedarWolf said:


> Can boot at 120 IA AC C-States and SpeedStep and SpeedShift disabled but idle VROUT is at 1.21V and when I run Prime95 I get 1.3v. But If a lower IA AC Loadline to 100 to lower Prime95 voltage, instant BSOD on boot. I think it sets idle voltage too low.


Don't want to oversimplify - my elder son's machine is on a Gigabyte z390 Ultra with a 9700k (oversimplifying it to a thread-less 9900k), and while the CPU is not exactly a SL winner, it stays at a fixed 1.325vcore with the svid disabled. Both loadline calibrations are on Turbo. C-states disabled. Power limits raised to max 4069 and current at 255. I don't remember the exact actual vcore values under Prime95/1344 in Windows though. Not your development, rather an alternate pov, but I found it a bit interesting.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> On Gigabyte Z390 what BIOS settings do you need for SVID enabled. I tried it with IA AC Loadline 140 and before it greyed out Normal +0.000 and instant BSOD on boot and when I went into the BIOS CPU voltage was at 1.21v.
> 
> Never mind, figured it out. Vcore on Auto, SVID Enabled, IA AC Loadline 140. This gives me 1.32v in Prime95 1344 FFTs, too high for my 5GHZ, but if I lower IA AC Loadline to even 130 I get BSODs on boot.


You're usually using a "positive" dvid offset, right? (before this stuff).

I haven't yet determined everything, but I think part of the issue is the AC Loadline being used to control output voltages on clockspeeds where you need a high vcore just to not crash.
It seems like, at least when games are loading that put up a sudden heavy load on the system (Battlefield 5, for example), the AC Loadline isn't boosting output voltages high enough for some very weird reason, which, after a point, just makes you crash. It may be part of how AC loadline sets the voltage influenced by CPU Current. I'm not sure if games are somehow interfering with stuff or not, since Prime95 and Cinebench didn't show anything weird. I did a little experiment, with the following settings:

AC Loadline: 160
SVID Offset: Enabled
DC Loadline:1 (this was done to check what AC Loadline is sending to the VRM by looking at the CPU VID).
Loadline calibration: Standard
Vcore: Auto
CPU: 5.1 ghz

When I ran prime95 29.8 b6, smallest FFT, AVX disabled, I saw the CPU Current was 155 amps, initial VID was 1.526v, and VR VOUT was 1.298v. There were no problems.
But when I loaded up Battlefield 5, I noticed that VR VOUT dropped down to about 1.250v and amps was lower also (although not much lower).

I then set set AC Loadline to 120 and ran Battlefield 5.
Three CPU L0 errors while the game was loading, between the black screen and the main menu, with VR VOUT dropping below 1.220v. Once the main menu appeared, VR VOUT rose to 1.30v.
They were on three different cores.

Then I set Vcore mode to "normal" and DVID to +0.005v, with ACLL 120.
BF5 loaded without any WHEA Errors.

Set DVID to +0.00v (should be the same as Auto, right?).
BF5 loaded with 1 CPU L0 WHEA Error.
(suspicious, 1 instead of 3?).

So I tried it again.
1 WHEA on load again. VR VOUT didn't seem any different than the "Auto" setting however.

I think I forgot to set Vcore back to fixed and try 1.325v + LLC: High to test that.

Anyway, it seems like the DVID setting sets a fixed vcore boost to the VRM before AC loadline does anything (though I can't really verify that), so then maybe the AC Loadline has to work less hard. But it does seem that relying on the AC loadline completely to control voltages is not as reliable as using a fixed vcore (this is always most reliable) or a DVID offset.

I wonder if this is also the reason why negative DVID offsets wind up BSODing people at very light loads when they have C-states enabled...? Because the AC Loadline can't raise the voltage enough when that Youtube video starts?


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> You're usually using a "positive" dvid offset, right? (before this stuff).
> 
> I haven't yet determined everything, but I think part of the issue is the AC Loadline being used to control output voltages on clockspeeds where you need a high vcore just to not crash.
> It seems like, at least when games are loading that put up a sudden heavy load on the system (Battlefield 5, for example), the AC Loadline isn't boosting output voltages high enough for some very weird reason, which, after a point, just makes you crash. It may be part of how AC loadline sets the voltage influenced by CPU Current. I'm not sure if games are somehow interfering with stuff or not, since Prime95 and Cinebench didn't show anything weird. I did a little experiment, with the following settings:
> 
> AC Loadline: 160
> SVID Offset: Enabled
> DC Loadline:1 (this was done to check what AC Loadline is sending to the VRM by looking at the CPU VID).
> Loadline calibration: Standard
> Vcore: Auto
> CPU: 5.1 ghz
> 
> When I ran prime95 29.8 b6, smallest FFT, AVX disabled, I saw the CPU Current was 155 amps, initial VID was 1.526v, and VR VOUT was 1.298v. There were no problems.
> But when I loaded up Battlefield 5, I noticed that VR VOUT dropped down to about 1.250v and amps was lower also (although not much lower).
> 
> I then set set AC Loadline to 120 and ran Battlefield 5.
> Three CPU L0 errors while the game was loading, between the black screen and the main menu, with VR VOUT dropping below 1.220v. Once the main menu appeared, VR VOUT rose to 1.30v.
> They were on three different cores.
> 
> Then I set Vcore mode to "normal" and DVID to +0.005v, with ACLL 120.
> BF5 loaded without any WHEA Errors.
> 
> Set DVID to +0.00v (should be the same as Auto, right?).
> BF5 loaded with 1 CPU L0 WHEA Error.
> (suspicious, 1 instead of 3?).
> 
> So I tried it again.
> 1 WHEA on load again. VR VOUT didn't seem any different than the "Auto" setting however.
> 
> I think I forgot to set Vcore back to fixed and try 1.325v + LLC: High to test that.
> 
> Anyway, it seems like the DVID setting sets a fixed vcore boost to the VRM before AC loadline does anything (though I can't really verify that), so then maybe the AC Loadline has to work less hard. But it does seem that relying on the AC loadline completely to control voltages is not as reliable as using a fixed vcore (this is always most reliable) or a DVID offset.
> 
> I wonder if this is also the reason why negative DVID offsets wind up BSODing people at very light loads when they have C-states enabled...? Because the AC Loadline can't raise the voltage enough when that Youtube video starts?


DVID (dynamic voltage identification digital) dynamically controls the core voltage with CPU load, CPU idle load, temperature and clock speed. DVID/SVID is very reliable to control core voltage stock default and overclocked. Problem you have and other folks have with DVID/SVID, you are undervolting the process causing instability or BSOD. 

Negative DVID offsets lowers the core voltage below stock default levels at low CPU load and idle CPU load. If you use loadline AC/DC 1 the low CPU load and idle CPU load stock default core voltage will not be reduced because there is no negative offset being used. 

I have never had a problem with overclocking using DVID/SVID offset since introduction in 2011. When setting up DVID offset don't use negative offset and don't pay to much attention to the voltage or fluctuation because it is to fast to really watch with different CPU loads and idle load, Your overcomplicating things when you try to understand what is going on with watching the core voltage. Just use LLC Auto as it will increase the core voltage for low CPU load and idle CPU load as Intel intended, then adjust the DVID offset until stable when stress testing and using the PC.

The only thing I change from default settings for overclocking the cores is the loadline AC/DC to 1 and DVD offset + level to under volt due to heat.


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> DVID (dynamic voltage identification digital) dynamically controls the core voltage with CPU load, CPU idle load, temperature and clock speed. DVID/SVID is very reliable to control core voltage stock default and overclocked. Problem you have and other folks have with DVID/SVID, you are undervolting the process causing instability or BSOD.
> 
> Negative DVID offsets lowers the core voltage below stock default levels at low CPU load and idle CPU load. If you use loadline AC/DC 1 the low CPU load and idle CPU load stock default core voltage will not be reduced because there is no negative offset being used.
> 
> I have never had a problem with overclocking using DVID/SVID offset since introduction in 2011. When setting up DVID offset don't use negative offset and don't pay to much attention to the voltage or fluctuation because it is to fast to really watch with different CPU loads and idle load, Your overcomplicating things when you try to understand what is going on with watching the core voltage. Just use LLC Auto as it will increase the core voltage for low CPU load and idle CPU load as Intel intended, then adjust the DVID offset until stable when stress testing and using the PC.
> 
> The only thing I change from default settings for overclocking the cores is the loadline AC/DC to 1 and DVD offset + level to under volt due to heat.


That's the problem. I already tried that. That causes excessively high voltage (Higher than what I either want or need) when you get to a very high overclock (in Cinebench R20), just to not have BF5 puke all over the VRM.
.
It's probably because of something Battlefield 5 is doing when you load the game. I saw this happen already.
Game does its launch+black screens then main menu and loads, VR VOUT drops to 1.215v. Main menu: VR VOUT is 1.320v. Yeah...

Did you see Buildzoid's probinator video on the Aorus Master? He said he tried using dynamic voltages on his probinator tests and found "strange" results that were not acting as expected, that didn't happen with fixed vcore.
He didn't go into details, but he said the VRM was acting "weird".


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> That's the problem. I already tried that. That causes excessively high voltage (Higher than what I either want or need) when you get to a very high overclock (in Cinebench R20), just to not have BF5 puke all over the VRM.
> .
> It's probably because of something Battlefield 5 is doing when you load the game. I saw this happen already.
> Game does its launch+black screens then main menu and loads, VR VOUT drops to 1.215v. Main menu: VR VOUT is 1.320v. Yeah...
> 
> Did you see Buildzoid's probinator video on the Aorus Master? He said he tried using dynamic voltages on his probinator tests and found "strange" results that were not acting as expected, that didn't happen with fixed vcore.
> He didn't go into details, but he said the VRM was acting "weird".


The DVID/SVID is very complicated to understand how it works, noting weird about it. Stock DVID/SVID runs fine on all the Intel PCs since 2011.

What maximum core voltage did you see running AUTO LLC, loadline AC/DC 1, with your settings for DVID offset?


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> The DVID/SVID is very complicated to understand how it works, noting weird about it. Stock DVID/SVID runs fine on all the Intel PCs since 2011.
> 
> What maximum core voltage did you see running AUTO LLC, loadline AC/DC 1, with your settings for DVID offset?


I used AC loadline 140 in the tests, not ACLL 1. DVID offset was 0. (DVID 0.000v). LLC was standard/normal (INTEL SPEC).
Cinebench R20 reported 1.315v

Battlefield 5 reported 1.220v during load. Which rose to 1.325v (from 1.305-1.360v) in the main menu.:/
I stay away from DVID because of that terrible profile bug that happens when you switch from DVID to fixed vcore. I dont like seeing 1.536v in BIOS. If I would have loaded windows I could have destroyed my CPU. I switch between profiles often. And that scares me. Please understand.

*Edit*
This is the bug I'm talking about here.

First, I set 5 ghz, Vcore: DVID. offset -0.050v, LLC: Standard, AC Loadline: 160.
Bios voltage was 1.356v. Correct behavior. Because DVID offset 0.00v or Auto voltage was 1.404v.

I then tried 2 things.

1) Changed voltage mode from Normal(DVID) mode to "Auto" mode.. DVID offset became greyed out, still showing -0.050v.
Saved and rebooted. Bios voltage was still 1.356v. The DVID offset was still being used >_> It was just not accessible anymore.

2) Changed to DVID mode, -0.050v, LLC Standard, AC 160 etc, saved rebooted. 1.356v as expected.

THEN I loaded my 4.7 ghz profile: 1.235v, Fixed, LLC: High
Saved and rebooted.

And was greeted by THIS monstrosity: (See screenshot and prepare for mind blown).


I clicked "Exit without saving", rebooted again:
Bios showed 1.236v (like it should).

I don't know what the hell it's doing but it looks like it was not even setting fixed voltage on the first reboot! And I have NO idea what it set.
It could be "Auto voltage + high loadline calibration" (doesn't make sense--I tested auto voltage before--it should be 1.296v at 4.7 ghz). Whatever it did, it's not good. 

This, my friend, is why I stay away from DVID. And yes I've reported it to Gigabyte. I just asked Stasio on tweaktown yesterday to please report it, because this bug has existed ever since this board was released! And it happens on ALL of the GB Z390 boards since the base code is pretty much the same (no idea about the Xtreme or Xtreme 5G however).


----------



## mattxx88

DarthFK said:


> Presumably, adaptive would allow the CPU to "drop" and cool down while not under load, hence saving it for longer. I don't remember where, but someone might have argued that, on another hand, the jumps and vdroop/overshoot from low speeds and voltages to high and too high might also be somewhat harmful to the CPU, due to the voltage spikes, hence leading me to think if LLC settings need to be adjusted even under adaptive mode. I personally do manual, as my voltages are low (1.28vcore for Prime95 under fft1344 non-AVX), and they should not degrade the CPU over the next 5-7 years. I might not keep the CPU till then, which is also a factor to account for. In fact, with these voltages it might just still be excellent even after 7 years. And at any time I have my 5GHz handy Not that I really needed, but it's a why not approach. That's why I keep it the fixed vcore & fixed 5GHz speed on at all times.
> 
> So, a lot can depend on your actual current voltages and even m,ore on your thinking. IMO, both options are fine if voltages are good, more about what you fancy, in such a case.


I did some tests this weekend

i found my sweet spot with offset mode disabling all C STATE and speedstep tecnology. What i see is that using offset mode instead of fixed is that core is mantained inside a better range of drop

FIXED MODE:

1.32v bios setting, will increase to 1.4v under prime95 (LLC6)

OFFSET MODE: 

1.32v bios setting, 1.34v increase under load (LLC5)

less overshoot voltage for my cpu

also tried Adaptive, but when you use avx software it increase really a lot the voltage, even more that in manual


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> I used AC loadline 140 in the tests, not ACLL 1. DVID offset was 0. (DVID 0.000v). LLC was standard/normal (INTEL SPEC).
> Cinebench R20 reported 1.315v
> 
> Battlefield 5 reported 1.220v during load. Which rose to 1.325v (from 1.305-1.360v) in the main menu.:/
> I stay away from DVID because of that terrible profile bug that happens when you switch from DVID to fixed vcore. I dont like seeing 1.536v in BIOS. If I would have loaded windows I could have destroyed my CPU. I switch between profiles often. And that scares me. Please understand.
> 
> *Edit*
> This is the bug I'm talking about here.
> 
> First, I set 5 ghz, Vcore: DVID. offset -0.050v, LLC: Standard, AC Loadline: 160.
> Bios voltage was 1.356v. Correct behavior. Because DVID offset 0.00v or Auto voltage was 1.404v.
> 
> I then tried 2 things.
> 
> 1) Changed voltage mode from Normal(DVID) mode to "Auto" mode.. DVID offset became greyed out, still showing -0.050v.
> Saved and rebooted. Bios voltage was still 1.356v. The DVID offset was still being used >_> It was just not accessible anymore.
> 
> 2) Changed to DVID mode, -0.050v, LLC Standard, AC 160 etc, saved rebooted. 1.356v as expected.
> 
> THEN I loaded my 4.7 ghz profile: 1.235v, Fixed, LLC: High
> Saved and rebooted.
> 
> And was greeted by THIS monstrosity: (See screenshot and prepare for mind blown).
> 
> 
> I clicked "Exit without saving", rebooted again:
> Bios showed 1.236v (like it should).
> 
> I don't know what the hell it's doing but it looks like it was not even setting fixed voltage on the first reboot! And I have NO idea what it set.
> It could be "Auto voltage + high loadline calibration" (doesn't make sense--I tested auto voltage before--it should be 1.296v at 4.7 ghz). Whatever it did, it's not good.
> 
> This, my friend, is why I stay away from DVID. And yes I've reported it to Gigabyte. I just asked Stasio on tweaktown yesterday to please report it, because this bug has existed ever since this board was released! And it happens on ALL of the GB Z390 boards since the base code is pretty much the same (no idea about the Xtreme or Xtreme 5G however).


I see your problem and I would test carefully. 

I had a problem like you described and support were able to duplicate the problem and make a new BIOS for everyone, so now I don't have that problem.

What you need to do is insist Gigabyte support test your BIOS setting changes to duplicate the problem. They only will test if the setting changes are with no overclocking and Intel specifications.


----------



## DarthFK

mattxx88 said:


> I did some tests this weekend
> 
> i found my sweet spot with offset mode disabling all C STATE and speedstep tecnology. What i see is that using offset mode instead of fixed is that core is mantained inside a better range of drop
> 
> FIXED MODE:
> 
> 1.32v bios setting, will increase to 1.4v under prime95 (LLC6)
> 
> OFFSET MODE:
> 
> 1.32v bios setting, 1.34v increase under load (LLC5)
> 
> less overshoot voltage for my cpu
> 
> also tried Adaptive, but when you use avx software it increase really a lot the voltage, even more that in manual


offset results sounds good, but I am not sure what's going on with the fixed and adaptive vcore - are these values with the AVX set to 1 or 2? It is LLC6, which will give some higher vdroop than LLC5, I would say, but it still seems that the vcore jump is too high (LLC6 from 1.32 to 1.4v, I mean). wouldn't llc5 work?

I hope you had a look at the previous posts in this thread about OC - Jpmboy has an OC guide in his sig and I linked Der8auer's video for 8700k overclock before (will link again below). But then, if the offset is fine for you, I wouldn't bother (that is if you cannot go lower on vcore and llc).


----------



## mattxx88

DarthFK said:


> offset results sounds good, but I am not sure what's going on with the fixed and adaptive vcore - are these values with the AVX set to 1 or 2?


i did a mistake in previous post, i tested with aida64 stress test FPU (suppose to be AVX2) stated this, the above results are those i wrote previous.
seems like when it feels AVX/AVX2 software running, gives more vcore with manual/adaptive



DarthFK said:


> It is LLC6, which will give some higher vdroop than LLC5, I would say, but it still seems that the vcore jump is too high (LLC6 from 1.32 to 1.4v, I mean). wouldn't llc5 work?


In manual mode, LLC5 gives me a (-) drop and makes mine oc unstable, so i use LLC6 that gives a positive (+) drop of the vcore when under load and keeps OC stable


another thing i see, in manual mode LL5 gives a (high) drop (-) in voltage (setting 1.32 inside bios, it drops till 1.26/28v under load in windows), on the other hand using LLC5 in offset mode gives a little "positive" drop (+)


----------



## DarthFK

mattxx88 said:


> i did a mistake in previous post, i tested with aida64 stress test FPU (suppose to be AVX2) stated this, the above results are those i wrote previous.
> seems like when it feels AVX/AVX2 software running, gives more vcore with manual/adaptive
> 
> 
> 
> In manual mode, LLC5 gives me a (-) drop and makes mine oc unstable, so i use LLC6 that gives a positive (+) drop of the vcore when under load and keeps OC stable
> 
> 
> another thing i see, in manual mode LL5 gives a (high) drop (-) in voltage (setting 1.32 inside bios, it drops till 1.26/28v under load in windows), on the other hand using LLC5 in offset mode gives a little "positive" drop (+)


Well, as I suggested earlier, if offset works ok then keep the offset  

However, re: fixed speed/vcore (or adaptive) and higher vdroop under AIDA64 FPU - I am of the opinion that your vdroop is still too high for 2AVX and LLC6. However, I am saying this with no clue about the hardware and settings you are using. Info about those might clarify some things. If you want to keep the offset, I guess we don't need to continue, but if you are interested in adaptive (and maybe fixed) voltages, especially adaptive, then it might come in handy to know your specs (cpu+speed etc, mobo, is RAM under XMP or not, or it's OC'd manually and what are the values), including details about your cooling (both the case+fan setup, as well as the actual cooler), as it influences the results. I clearly noticed higher vcore when certain air-coolers (Dark Rock Pro3) vs certain 240mm AIO&CLCs (FD Celsius with Typhoon fans or my Enermax [yeah, I know...] with Gentle Typhoons), on the same motherboards, for example.

Asus has a guide for adaptive vcore for 7700k, which is more or less useful as the 7700k, as well as 8700k-9700k etc, are still "upgraded" and tweaked 6th gen Skylakes (with more serious variations, but still a 7700k guide with vcore adjustments should work on a 8th and 9th gen CPUs). It might happen that a non-delidded 8700k may go hotter and sometimes require a higher vcore than a soldered 9700k, though it will very much depend on the "silicon lottery" too. So perhaps that adaptive vcore 7700k guide might help you keep your speeds/voltages and temps low, but I'd rather know what hardware & cooling, and ambient temps (celsius) do you have first. 

You might also want to double check your BIOS if your AVX is actually set to 2 there. Perhaps, after giving us the system specs, you can also post some screenshots of the HWinfo and CPU-z under FPU stress, so that we can actually have more clarity. Let me give you an example - I just ran AIDA64 FPU on my system (9700k + Maximus X Hero) and the vdroop from 1.28v in BIOS (1.296 in idle by CPU-Z/HWinfo), under LLC6 and AVX2, is low. It registers 1.28vcore - the approximate vdroop is 1.296-1.280=0.016v with 2AVX. That's with a 240mm CLC and top static pressure fans in the case and on the CLC with relatively moderate speeds. My son's CPU 9700k, in the other rig in pretty similar conditions, also under AIDA64 FPU test (only FPU checked), requires a 1.32v and his vcore drops on his Gigabyte z390 board with both LLCs on "Turbo" to 1.308v - that's a good example of the silicon lottery and different LLC settings, as well as vdroop on different motherboards.

Depending on your CPU and particularly motherboard, a higher vdroop can be sort of(!!!) justified, but we don't know that.

See two screenshots of my testing on my Asus Maximus board for about 30min under Aida64 FPU, fyi. The Maxmius VRM are the once ensuring a lower vdroop. A different board from Asus might not have the same VRM and/or VRM cooling. So, the specs ...  

Edit: just added pictures of the UEFI settings, fyi, it seems that those were uploaded in a reverse order, tho.


----------



## KedarWolf

@Jpmboy

I'm thinking of moving from the Aorus Master to the Z390 Apex.

I really have no use for 32GB of RAM, and I've heard great things about the Apex.

I got a Xmas bonus.


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> @*Jpmboy*
> 
> I'm thinking of moving from the Aorus Master to the Z390 Apex.
> 
> I really have no use for 32GB of RAM, and I've heard great things about the Apex.
> 
> I got a Xmas bonus.


 Make the move... the APEX XI is the best x390 board available (for us 2 slot dual channel fans  ) What... you have a 4x8GB kit?


ps: I'm torn between getting a TRX4 rig... or winter tires and rims for the C4S. First-world problem for sure.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> Make the move... the APEX XI is the best x390 board available (for us 2 slot dual channel fans  ) What... you have a 4x8GB kit?
> 
> 
> ps: I'm torn between getting a TRX4 rig... or winter tires and rims for the C4S. First-world problem for sure.


Remember that conversation about buying a 4x8GB CL16 3600 kit or two 2x8GB CL15 3600 kits?

I went with the CL16 kit, it was Trident Z black on black, I like the colours, (or lack of colour). 

This kit maybe?

G.Skill 16GB DDR4 Trident Z Royal Silver 4800Mhz PC4-38400 CL18 1.5V Dual Channel Kit (2x8GB)

https://www.amazon.com/G-Skill-Trident-4800Mhz-PC4-38400-Channel/dp/B07S98B5LW


----------



## ViTosS

Does anyone know why this happen (seems related to Windows 1903, since I didn't have it in previous Windows), Windows install automatically chipset driver 10.1.1.38, even if I download directly from Asus website and install the most recent chipset driver 10.1.18019.8144 and it shows installed via Programs, the driver is not detected in Device Manager, and there it shows the default 10.1.1.38 and also Intel 200 Series Chipset (like Z270 instead of my Z370), tried to reinstall many times and didn't change, I remember in build 1803 I had the proper Intel 300 Series Chipset showing there in Device Manager, but is no longer there and doesn't seem to ''detect'' the installation of the newest chipset driver.


----------



## mattxx88

DarthFK said:


> Well, as I suggested earlier, if offset works ok then keep the offset
> 
> However, re: fixed speed/vcore (or adaptive) and higher vdroop under AIDA64 FPU - I am of the opinion that your vdroop is still too high for 2AVX and LLC6. However, I am saying this with no clue about the hardware and settings you are using. Info about those might clarify some things. If you want to keep the offset, I guess we don't need to continue, but if you are interested in adaptive (and maybe fixed) voltages, especially adaptive, then it might come in handy to know your specs (cpu+speed etc, mobo, is RAM under XMP or not, or it's OC'd manually and what are the values), including details about your cooling (both the case+fan setup, as well as the actual cooler), as it influences the results. I clearly noticed higher vcore when certain air-coolers (Dark Rock Pro3) vs certain 240mm AIO&CLCs (FD Celsius with Typhoon fans or my Enermax [yeah, I know...] with Gentle Typhoons), on the same motherboards, for example.
> 
> Asus has a guide for adaptive vcore for 7700k, which is more or less useful as the 7700k, as well as 8700k-9700k etc, are still "upgraded" and tweaked 6th gen Skylakes (with more serious variations, but still a 7700k guide with vcore adjustments should work on a 8th and 9th gen CPUs). It might happen that a non-delidded 8700k may go hotter and sometimes require a higher vcore than a soldered 9700k, though it will very much depend on the "silicon lottery" too. So perhaps that adaptive vcore 7700k guide might help you keep your speeds/voltages and temps low, but I'd rather know what hardware & cooling, and ambient temps (celsius) do you have first.
> 
> You might also want to double check your BIOS if your AVX is actually set to 2 there. Perhaps, after giving us the system specs, you can also post some screenshots of the HWinfo and CPU-z under FPU stress, so that we can actually have more clarity. Let me give you an example - I just ran AIDA64 FPU on my system (9700k + Maximus X Hero) and the vdroop from 1.28v in BIOS (1.296 in idle by CPU-Z/HWinfo), under LLC6 and AVX2, is low. It registers 1.28vcore - the approximate vdroop is 1.296-1.280=0.016v with 2AVX. That's with a 240mm CLC and top static pressure fans in the case and on the CLC with relatively moderate speeds. My son's CPU 9700k, in the other rig in pretty similar conditions, also under AIDA64 FPU test (only FPU checked), requires a 1.32v and his vcore drops on his Gigabyte z390 board with both LLCs on "Turbo" to 1.308v - that's a good example of the silicon lottery and different LLC settings, as well as vdroop on different motherboards.
> 
> Depending on your CPU and particularly motherboard, a higher vdroop can be sort of(!!!) justified, but we don't know that.
> 
> See two screenshots of my testing on my Asus Maximus board for about 30min under Aida64 FPU, fyi. The Maxmius VRM are the once ensuring a lower vdroop. A different board from Asus might not have the same VRM and/or VRM cooling. So, the specs ...
> 
> Edit: just added pictures of the UEFI settings, fyi, it seems that those were uploaded in a reverse order, tho.


really great post man!

atm i am at work and cannot provide you any screen, but i can give some info about my system:

Maximus X Formula
9900Ks 5.2Ghz OC
Ram Patriot 4400 cas19, OC'ed @ 4000 cas 16 (manual OC, no XMP)

AVX negative ratio setted to 0

and i am on a custom loop



tonight i provide you pics from bios, in extreme tweak tab i setted all maximum


----------



## DarthFK

mattxx88 said:


> Maximus X Formula
> 9900Ks 5.2Ghz OC
> Ram Patriot 4400 cas19, OC'ed @ 4000 cas 16 (manual OC, no XMP)
> 
> AVX negative ratio setted to 0
> 
> and i am on a custom loop


 My friend, if your AVX is 0 and you're running your 9900KS @5.2GHz and you've also placed some strain on the IMC due to lowering the cl to 16, you were supposed to actually have a bit of a high vdroop under FPU. What I am still not sure about, is why your vdroop is seemingly (to me) considerably higher during fixed vcore and (partly not sure) during adaptive voltages, compared to what seemed a considerably smaller vdroop under the offset vcore. Perhaps our guru @Jpmboy can weigh in, as I simply forget what I don't use and would really need to dig out the explanations from a very old thread I used to consult (complete oc guide to sandy bridge / asrock edition by kennyparker1337, here on OCN) and from some of the buildzoid videos, which is problematic this week. You see, in the meantime our communications will be sporadic  due to Thanksgiving holidays and travels 

P.S. read the following link and perhaps experiment a bit with the adaptive meanwhile:
https://rog.asus.com/articles/guides/the-kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/


----------



## mattxx88

DarthFK said:


> My friend, if your AVX is 0 and you're running your 9900KS @5.2GHz and you've also placed some strain on the IMC due to lowering the cl to 16, you were supposed to actually have a bit of a high vdroop under FPU. What I am still not sure about, is why your vdroop is seemingly (to me) considerably higher during fixed vcore and (partly not sure) during adaptive voltages, compared to what seemed a considerably smaller vdroop under the offset vcore. Perhaps our guru @Jpmboy can weigh in, as I simply forget what I don't use and would really need to dig out the explanations from a very old thread I used to consult (complete oc guide to sandy bridge / asrock edition by kennyparker1337, here on OCN) and from some of the buildzoid videos, which is problematic this week. You see, in the meantime our communications will be sporadic  due to Thanksgiving holidays and travels
> 
> P.S. read the following link and perhaps experiment a bit with the adaptive meanwhile:
> https://rog.asus.com/articles/guides/the-kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/


last night i did some more tests after doing a nice CMOS and re-do OC again with your tips and der8auer video you linked
i still see a high positive drop of voltage in manual mode as i got bofore, but NVM, i prefer the Offset mode OC, like i did with my previous 8086k

i see there's new voices in the last bios revision of my Formlua X that wasn't in the previous version when i got 8086k installed, maybe i will ask in this thread when i want to deepen them

about vccio e vccsa i setted them @1.175v in bios that gives me real voltages of about 1.2v inside OS and 1.38v to ram module cause of low cas

next step is try to make adaptive voltage wotking (i saved 2 OC profile, offset OC; Manual OC and the last will be adaptive)

PS thanks again and have nice holidays


----------



## Robostyle

Is there any significant improvement in monitoring and OCeing I will get, if I change my m10 hero(formula vrm) to m11 gene?


----------



## KedarWolf

@Jpmboy

I'm getting my Maximum X Apex today.

You wouldn't have your BIOS settings handy by any chance, screens, or even just the .txt output?


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> @*Jpmboy*
> 
> I'm getting my Maximum X Apex today.
> 
> You wouldn't have your BIOS settings handy by any chance, screens, or even just the .txt output?


Apex 10 or Apex 11?


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> Apex 10 or Apex 11?


Sorry, Maximus XI Apex, not X.


----------



## ntuason

delete.


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> Sorry, Maximus XI Apex, not X.


yeah, I don;t have that board (Max XI extreme). But you will be able to run ram 4500+ without much effort. Even the 3600c16s can handle that..... of course, the CPU IMC runs the show.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, I don;t have that board (Max XI extreme). But you will be able to run ram 4500+ without much effort. Even the 3600c16s can handle that..... of course, the CPU IMC runs the show.


Can I get the .txt from the Extreme, most of the BIOS settings should be pretty much the same, give me a general idea.


----------



## mattxx88

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, I don;t have that board (Max XI extreme). But you will be able to run ram 4500+ without much effort. Even the 3600c16s can handle that..... of course, the CPU IMC runs the show.


Hi Jp ,i bought a nice kit of patriot 4400 c19 using them with a 9900ks, do you think it's cause of my Formula X that i can't push them over 4133mhz?
i can reach 4000 cas 16, 3800 cas 14 without any issue and nice voltages (1.4v, 1.18/1.18) but nothing more

i tried to relax timings 4400 21-22-22-38 but my system can't boot even with 1.5v
vccio/sa pushed max @1.22v (1.25 in OS)


----------



## l Nuke l

just did a clean install of windows server 2012 r2 standard for cinibench benchmarking. was wondering what i need to do as far as motherboard drivers? anyone running this os can speak on the setup process? or am i good to go with no drivers or internet connectivity?


----------



## Robostyle

Ok, try another one - any owners of Maximus XI Gene?


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, I don;t have that board (Max XI extreme). But you will be able to run ram 4500+ without much effort. Even the 3600c16s can handle that..... of course, the CPU IMC runs the show.


 @Jpmboy

Can I get the .txt file of your BIOS settings for the Maximus XI Extreme, they should be very similiar to my Apex and it would a good guide for me.

You may have missed my request last week, or it could be possible you actually have a life and don't have enough time for us overclocking plebs these days. 

I j/k, hope to heard from you soon. 

Edit: What is that new Asus forum you're in, the ROG one?


----------



## chibi

KedarWolf said:


> @Jpmboy
> 
> Can I get the .txt file of your BIOS settings for the Maximus XI Extreme, they should be very similiar to my Apex and it would a good guide for me.
> 
> You may have missed my request last week, or it could be possible you actually have a life and don't have enough time for us overclocking plebs these days.
> 
> I j/k, hope to heard from you soon.
> 
> Edit: What is that new Asus forum you're in, the ROG one?



Hey Kedar,

Here's my Apex XI settings for 5.0 GHz and 4200 C16 1T ram. Take a peak in the mean time. :thumb:



Edit - for the memory, I tweaked the RTL/IO offset after taking the SS to lower the IO to 5.
Edit 2 - just noticed both my tRDWR_sg & tRDWR_dg are set to [Auto]. Going to change these to 15.


----------



## munternet

Robostyle said:


> Ok, try another one - any owners of Maximus XI Gene?


I went from a Maximus X Hero to Maximus XI Gene 
Also went from 8700k to 9900ks otherwise it's the same rig
Only downside I noticed was the single controllable system fan header, since I use T-sensor and Qfan for fan speed control through coolant temps and BIOS.
I found daisy chaining the EK 4 way fan splitters with molex main power was the best/simplest way yet to control fans, so it turned into a silver lining, less clutter in the m/board 
She's no Apex but I like it 

On another note, what is Asus TurboV Core? Is it worth using? and where do i get it?
I already got version 1.02.02 but not sure if it's the right one (thanks @Jpmboy  )


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> Can I get the .txt from the Extreme, most of the BIOS settings should be pretty much the same, give me a general idea.


sorry bud - been "in and out" all week. I see you got an answer above. Anyway, my MaxXI is in Annapolis MD being abused by my nephew cadet. 


mattxx88 said:


> Hi Jp ,i bought a nice kit of patriot 4400 c19 using them with a 9900ks, do you think it's cause of my Formula X that i can't push them over 4133mhz?
> i can reach 4000 cas 16, 3800 cas 14 without any issue and nice voltages (1.4v, 1.18/1.18) but nothing more
> 
> i tried to relax timings 4400 21-22-22-38 but my system can't boot even with 1.5v
> vccio/sa pushed max @1.22v (1.25 in OS)


The Formula X should be capable. The 9900Ks may need more like 1.3V VSA and VCCIO to push past 4200. Would need to see settings and voltages with stability data to know where we are starting from (a solid base).


----------



## edhutner

Hi guys. I am new to asus motherboards. Have been long term user of gigabyte boards (last z390 pro and master). Recently I switched to maximus xi gene. So far I am very satisfied by voltage consistency and bios. I have been following buildzoid guidlines and results. I am trying to overclock my 9900k and have noticed a huge vdroop that I am not sure if it is normal. That is why I am posting here.

So here are the tools, settings and measurements:
For load test I use prime95 29.8b6 40k inplace fft and occt 5.4.2 small avx load. They both gives me almost the same power usage and voltages. For measurement I use hwinfo64 6.20 vcore and cpu power readings.

Uncore 43. Avx offset 0. XMP disabled. Manual voltage with svid disabled.
Vdroop calculatin is Vidle-Vload. Power is max value.

1. x47, vcore 1.22v, llc 5 -> idle 1.208v, load 1.066v, power 173w, vdroop 142mv
(This is my minimal vcore setting - passed 8 hours stability p95 blend passed)

The others are only for measurement not tested for stability.
(A) x47, vcore 1.26v, *llc 4* -> idle 1.243v, load 1.058v, power 167w, vdroop 185mv -- edit this was typo llc6, real it is llc4

(B) x50, vcore 1.35v, llc 5 -> idle 1.332v, load 1.163v, power 225w, vdroop 169mv

(C) x50, vcore 1.36v, llc 5 -> idle 1.341v, load 1.172v, power 231w, vdroop 169mv

(D) x50, vcore 1.38v, llc 5 -> idle 1.359v, load 1.190v, power 243w, vdroop 169mv

(E) x50, vcore 1.39v, llc 4 -> idle 1.368v, load 1.146v, power 216w, vdroop 222mv

What bothers me is the vdroop. Is it normal to be that high for l5 and l4 llc?


----------



## Jpmboy

edhutner said:


> Hi guys. I am new to asus motherboards. Have been long term user of gigabyte boards (last z390 pro and master). Recently I switched to maximus xi gene. So far I am very satisfied by voltage consistency and bios. I have been following buildzoid guidlines and results. I am trying to overclock my 9900k and have noticed a huge vdroop that I am not sure if it is normal. That is why I am posting here.
> 
> So here are the tools, settings and measurements:
> For load test I use prime95 29.8b6 40k inplace fft and occt 5.4.2 small avx load. They both gives me almost the same power usage and voltages. For measurement I use hwinfo64 6.20 vcore and cpu power readings.
> 
> Uncore 43. Avx offset 0. XMP disabled. Manual voltage with svid disabled.
> Vdroop calculatin is Vidle-Vload. Power is max value.
> 
> 1. x47, vcore 1.22v, llc 5 -> idle 1.208v, load 1.066v, power 173w, vdroop 142mv
> (This is my minimal vcore setting - passed 8 hours stability p95 blend passed)
> 
> The others are only for measurement not tested for stability.
> (A) x47, vcore 1.26v, llc 6 -> idle 1.243v, load 1.058v, power 167w, vdroop 185mv
> 
> (B) x50, vcore 1.35v, llc 5 -> idle 1.332v, load 1.163v, power 225w, vdroop 169mv
> 
> (C) x50, vcore 1.36v, llc 5 -> idle 1.341v, load 1.172v, power 231w, vdroop 169mv
> 
> (D) x50, vcore 1.38v, llc 5 -> idle 1.359v, load 1.190v, power 243w, vdroop 169mv
> 
> (E) x50, vcore 1.39v, llc 4 -> idle 1.368v, load 1.146v, power 216w, vdroop 222mv
> 
> What bothers me is the vdroop. Is it normal to be that high for l5 and l4 llc?


 Yeah, that's a lot of vdroop. is this manual or adaptive voltage? (i'm assuming manual since it's idling at the set vcore). what IA/AC value is set in bios? Also, does the system need 1.3-ish volts for stability in non-avx loads?
Check the ASUS x370 guide in my sig. it's the same for z390


----------



## smilinjohn

I'm still having issues with installing Windows on Asus boards any Asus board...


First it was a Strix, then a Maximus, eariler this week it was a Strix Z290 board.


I've built computers in the last month with Asus, MSI, Gigabite, and ASRock boards. 



When building with Asus boards and ONLY Asus boards, EVERY TIME I have had to use my ASRock board to format a drive with Windows then transfer that drive to the Asus board. 



Gonna have to replace the ASRock since I sold it today.


----------



## Jpmboy

smilinjohn said:


> I'm still having issues with installing Windows on Asus boards any Asus board...
> First it was a Strix, then a Maximus, eariler this week it was a Strix Z290 board.
> I've built computers in the last month with Asus, MSI, Gigabite, and ASRock boards.
> When building with Asus boards and ONLY Asus boards, EVERY TIME I have had to use my ASRock board to format a drive with Windows then transfer that drive to the Asus board.
> Gonna have to replace the ASRock since I sold it today.


Yeah, you're doing something wrong somehow. W10 installs straight up on the 6 asus boards (and 2 gigabyte, 2 asrock) boards running here, Did you use try using the disk format/cleaner from within the ASUS bios?


----------



## edhutner

@Jpmboy
It's manual voltage. Ac/dc is set to 1/1 in bios (I think is not playing here at all, since i have disabled svid and communication between cpu and vrm). Regarding the needed voltage - i have not tested non avx, the both scenario i test are avx (i just want to cover worst case scenario).

I have read your guide and see that you got much lower vdroop.
I believe that 8700k has lower power draw. And probably also the stress tests in the guide used to establish the required voltage are not so stressful to cause such high drop or may be my board is having an issue


----------



## Falkentyne

edhutner said:


> @Jpmboy
> It's manual voltage. Ac/dc is set to 1/1 in bios (I think is not playing here at all, since i have disabled svid and communication between cpu and vrm). Regarding the needed voltage - i have not tested non avx, the both scenario i test are avx (i just want to cover worst case scenario).
> 
> I have read your guide and see that you got much lower vdroop.
> I believe that 8700k has lower power draw. And probably also the stress tests in the guide used to establish the required voltage are not so stressful to cause such high drop or may be my board is having an issue


Please post the HWINFO64 screenshot with the "Asus EC" window open with the "CPU Current" and "CPU Power" settings, as well as the vcore values.
Post the BIOS set voltage as well that you set there and the LLC like you did before.

That is a lot of vdroop but that also depends on how much current you're pulling. If that's small FFT FMA3, it could be, but that ALSO depends on what "mOhms" LLC4 and LLC5 are setting in your BIOS.

I just saw a user who set LLC7 on his Maximus XI Hero, which was setting 0.4 mOhms of VRM Loadline. LLC7 is usually much closer to 0.2 mOhms (85% reduced vdroop, based on a 1.6 mOhm baseline), not 0.4 mOhm (which is 75% reduced vdroop based on 1.6 mOhms).

Looking at your post above, it looks a LOT like your LLC levels are messed up. Like, LLC6 is using the LLC5 values and LLC5 is using the LLC4 values.
Your LLC6 seems to be 0.8 mOhms of loadline, which is definitely *NOT* what @criskoe got when he tested LLC6 on his (Apex or XI Extreme--I forgot what board he had).

I saw someone on the Asus forums complain several months back (again dont remember if it was a Hero, Gene or Formula) about very excessive vdroop at LLC6 on his 9900k. He RMA'd the board for another of the exact same model and the new board had significantly less vdroop at the exact same BIOS settings.

Have you tried doing a complete CMOS clear?

These are the Gene results for vdroop by Elmor.
https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/

Pretty safe to say LLC6 was not using a 0.8 mOhm loadline in those shots.


----------



## edhutner

Falkentyne said:


> Please post the HWINFO64 screenshot with the "Asus EC" window open with the "CPU Current" and "CPU Power" settings, as well as the vcore values.
> Post the BIOS set voltage as well that you set there and the LLC like you did before.
> 
> That is a lot of vdroop but that also depends on how much current you're pulling. If that's small FFT FMA3, it could be, but that ALSO depends on what "mOhms" LLC4 and LLC5 are setting in your BIOS.
> 
> I just saw a user who set LLC7 on his Maximus XI Hero, which was setting 0.4 mOhms of VRM Loadline. LLC7 is usually much closer to 0.2 mOhms (85% reduced vdroop, based on a 1.6 mOhm baseline), not 0.4 mOhm (which is 75% reduced vdroop based on 1.6 mOhms).


Hi Falkentyne. Thanks for responding  Currently I cannot do screenshots. I am on vacation, but before I leave I copied all hwinfo logs to my laptop for analyzing. I will attach some here.
Yes it was 40k fft fma3.


----------



## Falkentyne

edhutner said:


> Hi Falkentyne. Thanks for responding  Currently I cannot do screenshots. I am on vacation, but before I leave I copied all hwinfo logs to my laptop for analyzing. I will attach some here.
> Yes it was 40k fft fma3.


I see. I edited my last post and put in other stuff after you replied, by the way.
Ok enjoy your vacation. But yeah your logs are showing a 0.8 mOhm loadline for LLC6 and a 1.0 (approximate) Loadline for LLC5. LLC6 is supposed to be -75% reduced vdroop or 0.4 mOhms (intel spec is 1.6 mOhms on this 8 core SKU which is equal to LLC2. LLC1 is 2.1 mOhms--which is for 4 and 6 core Intel spec).

If clear cmos doesn't help fix this calibration, you may need to use LLC7 for 0.4 mOhms (you would have to post bios set voltage, LLC level, load "Amps" current and load voltage for me to calculate it).


----------



## smilinjohn

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, you're doing something wrong somehow. W10 installs straight up on the 6 asus boards (and 2 gigabyte, 2 asrock) boards running here,



Not doing anything different on the Asus boards than I'm doing on ASRock, MIS, or Gygabyte boards. Plug in the USB/boot computer/load BIOS/boot override USB/Windows installs. I've even let it boot straight into the installer without forcing it in BIOS.





Jpmboy said:


> Did you use try using the disk format/cleaner from within the ASUS bios?



Yes I've tried that and I've tried letting the Windows installer wipe and format the drive. 



A USB that fails to install Windows on the 3 ASUS boards I've had this issue with has successfully installed it on all the other boards, it even reinstalled it on a Surface Pro tablet.


Surely to the gods I'm not the only one having this issue


----------



## edhutner

@Falkentyne
 I also had made an error - scenario (A) were typo llc6 - in fact it was llc4. Edited my post.
Here I prepared the files (CSV logs and screenshots from hwinfo log viewer)
p.s. I forgot to add, I did initially updated the bios to 1602 and then did reset/clean cmos from the button on the back.


----------



## Jpmboy

smilinjohn said:


> Not doing anything different on the Asus boards than I'm doing on ASRock, MIS, or Gygabyte boards. Plug in the USB/boot computer/load BIOS/boot override USB/Windows installs. I've even let it boot straight into the installer without forcing it in BIOS.
> Yes I've tried that and I've tried letting the Windows installer wipe and format the drive.
> A USB that fails to install Windows on the 3 ASUS boards I've had this issue with has successfully installed it on all the other boards, it even reinstalled it on a Surface Pro tablet.
> Surely to the gods I'm not the only one having this issue


 Sorry bud, wish I could help - but have not had the problem at all (win 7 on a asrock x470 board is a nightmare story tho - have to edit th ewindows installer with NTLite)
So... USB 2.0 only (the 3.0 drivers are not yet installed), use a 2.0 port if there are any, USB installer created with a W10 rig using media creation tool... wired mouse and keyboard. If that don't work, after using the bios SSD tool... damn. Like you I think, I hate porting OS images from other installs. They're just not "clean". 

:thinking:


----------



## smilinjohn

Jpmboy said:


> Sorry bud, wish I could help - but have not had the problem at all (win 7 on a asrock x470 board is a nightmare story tho - have to edit th ewindows installer with NTLite)



Yea no thanks I'll stick to W10, unless I get an old machine then I have a W7 installer CD that'll do the job




Jpmboy said:


> So... USB 2.0 only (the 3.0 drivers are not yet installed), use a 2.0 port if there are any, USB installer created with a W10 rig using media creation tool...



I'll keep this in mind, can't say if it failed on USB 2.0 because I just plug it into a port. The USB installer I use is 2.0 though.





Jpmboy said:


> wired mouse and keyboard.



That's all I use setting up a new PC, if a customer wants me to install a wireless I make them bring it and install it after I push all of the OS updates, and other software, a wireless setup is the last thing I install.





Jpmboy said:


> If that don't work, after using the bios SSD tool... damn. Like you I think, I hate porting OS images from other installs. They're just not "clean".
> 
> :thinking:



Eh... I don't mind porting them from setting them up on a different board, the PIA is having to get all the parts out to setup essentially a second computer, AND THEN I have to tear it all down and pack it away again. I live in a small studio apartment so I don't have a test bench setup and all my spare parts are packed in a tote. The OS never seems to mind the switch, just wait to install product keys until you have in on the platform to which it will run. But I shouldn't have to jump through such hoops to get a OS to work on a board, makes me almost want to buy a different brand than deal with the headache.


But while I wait on parts for the build on the bench now (ASRock) I took my spare WD Blue M.2 and installed W10 on it today just on the off chance that I'll need it in the near future for my main rig since I'm selling my only non ASUS board.


----------



## edhutner

Falkentyne said:


> I see. I edited my last post and put in other stuff after you replied, by the way.
> Ok enjoy your vacation. But yeah your logs are showing a 0.8 mOhm loadline for LLC6 and a 1.0 (approximate) Loadline for LLC5. LLC6 is supposed to be -75% reduced vdroop or 0.4 mOhms (intel spec is 1.6 mOhms on this 8 core SKU which is equal to LLC2. LLC1 is 2.1 mOhms--which is for 4 and 6 core Intel spec).
> 
> If clear cmos doesn't help fix this calibration, you may need to use LLC7 for 0.4 mOhms (you would have to post bios set voltage, LLC level, load "Amps" current and load voltage for me to calculate it).


You are correct. I edited my first post (was llc6 instead of the correct llc4)

I made some calculations. Please check the screenshot in this post. Generally what I see is:
llc4 ~ 1.3 mOhm
llc5 ~ 1 mOhm
llc6 ~ 0.4 mOhm


Does this seems normal? Can I have confidence that my board is not fault and continue forward with OC attempts 
BTW I delided the 9900k and put a copper IHS heatsink that gave me about 9 degrees at stock frequencies under heavy stress. I wanted to go direct die, but I found out that my cooler is not suitable. The block of the Arctic Liquid Freezer II does not have enough clearance and touches the capacitors around the cpu.

In this relation the above calculations are not very precise because I noticed that the current is varying from the temperature, but the vcore not. I mean copper relid vs stock, same test, same settings - both result in same vcore, but the average current for the delided is some amps lower (in the screenshot it is id 1020 and id 1060).


----------



## tomimoi42

Hello!

I just got my new set! Asus Strix z390 F motherboard, 16Gb Kingston 3200MHz, i5 9600k...
Waiting for the Arctic MX4 to arrive, so I can put on my Noctua NH-D14 on it.

I haven't really got clear information about the VRM on this motherboard, is it the same as the model E? Are they good for this CPU? How much OC would you expect (with that cooler, Nexus 1000W PSU, and plenty of other fans in a Fractal case) or none at all?

Anyway, any pointers or input will be very much appreciated.


BTW running now i7 2600k @ 4,4GHz (Was 4,9 for years before needing too much voltage) so any pR0HaX OC techniques I can process (most likely =)).


----------



## l Nuke l

tomimoi42 said:


> Hello!
> 
> I just got my new set! Asus Strix z390 F motherboard, 16Gb Kingston 3200MHz, i5 9600k...
> Waiting for the Arctic MX4 to arrive, so I can put on my Noctua NH-D14 on it.
> 
> I haven't really got clear information about the VRM on this motherboard, is it the same as the model E? Are they good for this CPU? How much OC would you expect (with that cooler, Nexus 1000W PSU, and plenty of other fans in a Fractal case) or none at all?
> 
> Anyway, any pointers or input will be very much appreciated.
> 
> 
> BTW running now i7 2600k @ 4,4GHz (Was 4,9 for years before needing too much voltage) so any pR0HaX OC techniques I can process (most likely =)).


the cooler will prob hold you back before the vrm does.


----------



## Jpmboy

tomimoi42 said:


> Hello!
> 
> I just got my new set! Asus Strix z390 F motherboard, 16Gb Kingston 3200MHz, i5 9600k...
> Waiting for the Arctic MX4 to arrive, so I can put on my Noctua NH-D14 on it.
> 
> I haven't really got clear information about the VRM on this motherboard, is it the same as the model E? Are they good for this CPU? How much OC would you expect (with that cooler, Nexus 1000W PSU, and plenty of other fans in a Fractal case) or none at all?
> 
> Anyway, any pointers or input will be very much appreciated.
> 
> 
> BTW running now i7 2600k @ 4,4GHz (Was 4,9 for years before needing too much voltage) so any pR0HaX OC techniques I can process (most likely =)).


the strix can handle the 9600K easy. If that's a decent cpu sample, 5.0 should be doable with a NH-D14 and good air flow. MX4? there are better TIMs. :thumb:


----------



## l Nuke l

Jpmboy said:


> the strix can handle the 9600K easy. If that's a decent cpu sample, 5.0 should be doable with a NH-D14 and good air flow. MX4? there are better TIMs. :thumb:


i am digging the kpx. previously used kryonaut. but i am liking the 30g tub vs the tube.


----------



## l Nuke l

any guides on how to solder leads to the probeit pads on the motherboard? Would like to read voltage without having to hold my leads.


----------



## tomimoi42

Thanks a lot fellas! Yeah, I read some reviews and there were some better ones, but I got good deal on the MX4 on ebay so I took that and have previous experience with it so...


----------



## Jpmboy

l Nuke l said:


> i am digging the kpx. previously used kryonaut. but i am liking the 30g tub vs the tube.


Check out Swifttech's Tim-Mate TIM2. Great stuff.


----------



## lukart

TMatzelle60 said:


> Is the Maximus X Hero (Wifi) a reliable well made motherboard? I always hear horror stories with asus rma and want to make sure i get a good board for my 8700K



Asus motherboards are rock solid, I don't know about the RMA process if they take long but their RMA rates should be pretty low.


----------



## TMatzelle60

lukart said:


> Asus motherboards are rock solid, I don't know about the RMA process if they take long but their RMA rates should be pretty low.


Wow your late lol


----------



## robertr1

@KedarWolf I'm switching to an XI Apex also from my GB Pro and it's arriving today. Was wondering how you're getting along?

Any tips or things to look out for so far?


----------



## Robostyle

munternet said:


> I went from a Maximus X Hero to Maximus XI Gene
> Also went from 8700k to 9900ks otherwise it's the same rig
> Only downside I noticed was the single controllable system fan header, since I use T-sensor and Qfan for fan speed control through coolant temps and BIOS.
> I found daisy chaining the EK 4 way fan splitters with molex main power was the best/simplest way yet to control fans, so it turned into a silver lining, less clutter in the m/board
> She's no Apex but I like it
> 
> On another note, what is Asus TurboV Core? Is it worth using? and where do i get it?
> I already got version 1.02.02 but not sure if it's the right one (thanks @Jpmboy  )


I see. 
yeah, I use Tsensor too, and fan speeds on rads correlated with water temp. So that is one of my primary concerns, since Maximus X hero doesn't allow you to choose temperature source for w_pump and aio_pump headers, which is just a joke 

But what about software voltage report, by maximus xi gene? Is it good enough for not keeping osc nearby?


----------



## Chobbit

smilinjohn said:


> Not doing anything different on the Asus boards than I'm doing on ASRock, MIS, or Gygabyte boards. Plug in the USB/boot computer/load BIOS/boot override USB/Windows installs. I've even let it boot straight into the installer without forcing it in BIOS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes I've tried that and I've tried letting the Windows installer wipe and format the drive.
> 
> 
> 
> A USB that fails to install Windows on the 3 ASUS boards I've had this issue with has successfully installed it on all the other boards, it even reinstalled it on a Surface Pro tablet.
> 
> 
> Surely to the gods I'm not the only one having this issue


Have you disabled your wifi adapter in the bios? Asus usually put information in the manual (or an extra sheet in the box) telling you to disable it when you are formatting and installing windows or it causes issues with the install. 

You can turn it back on as soon after installing windows

Cheers


----------



## l Nuke l

So went I ahead and soldered evga's probe-it cables on to my apex here is the link to the thread with pics. =] https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...asus-maximus-x-apex-evga-probe-cable-mod.html


----------



## Jpmboy

*@munternet*
TurboVcore lets you adjust voltages from the desktop (and load saved profiles). works great if you want to do that. :thumb:





l Nuke l said:


> So went I ahead and soldered evga's probe-it cables on to my apex here is the link to the thread with pics. =] https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...asus-maximus-x-apex-evga-probe-cable-mod.html


 Super soldering job! Very nice and much easier than poking around with DMM probes!


----------



## l Nuke l

Jpmboy said:


> *@munternet*
> TurboVcore lets you adjust voltages from the desktop (and load saved profiles). works great if you want to do that. :thumb:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Super soldering job! Very nice and much easier than poking around with DMM probes!


thanks dude. and hell yeah totally worth it. and fun too. I like tinkering with stuff. Just have to get over that initial fear of messing something up and just go for it.


----------



## eminded1

So I updated to 1401 on my z390 Maximus Hero (WIFI) and i cannot get my old settings to work... no matter what I try I can get the ram to 4266 like with 1301, it will not boot in the bios update list stated memory compatilibty fixed but I still cant boot with the new 1401 bios... BTW I reset the bios back to 1301 and my settings work 100% 

what is it with the new bios 1401 some memory bug maybe???? let me know if anyone else is experiencing this,.


heres my components
i9 9900kf @ 5ghz 1.32Vcore on a Corsair h150i Pro
32GB DDR4 @ 4266mhz 17 18 18 38 1.5vdimm
RTX 2080 TI
ASUS Maximus Hero z390 WIFI
2TB 660p Intel NVMe
EVGA 750w GQ PSU


----------



## l Nuke l

eminded1 said:


> So I updated to 1401 on my z390 Maximus Hero (WIFI) and i cannot get my old settings to work... no matter what I try I can get the ram to 4266 like with 1301, it will not boot in the bios update list stated memory compatilibty fixed but I still cant boot with the new 1401 bios... BTW I reset the bios back to 1301 and my settings work 100%
> 
> what is it with the new bios 1401 some memory bug maybe???? let me know if anyone else is experiencing this,.
> 
> 
> heres my components
> i9 9900kf @ 5ghz 1.32Vcore on a Corsair h150i Pro
> 32GB DDR4 @ 4266mhz 17 18 18 38 1.5vdimm
> RTX 2080 TI
> ASUS Maximus Hero z390 WIFI
> 2TB 660p Intel NVMe
> EVGA 750w GQ PSU


I experienced something similar on my M10Apex. Bios 1003 and under are the only versions that I can run 4266 17 18 18 38 1T any bios after 1103 is not stable for me.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

So is it a case of "if it ain't broke don't fix it" with the new 1401 BIOS.
I'm running 1302 on a Apex XI with a 9900K, from the BIOS description it mention tjmax fixes for the KS.

"ROG MAXIMUS XI APEX BIOS 1401
Improve Memory overclocking rules
Improved compatibility with the Intel H10 Optane Module
Fixed an issue that prevented the adjustment of the Tjmax parameter when using an i9-9900KS processor"

Have no problems with the 9900k running 5Ghz (I do us PL for extreme AVX loads though).
But I'm also not overclocking memory either.


----------



## Jpmboy

eminded1 said:


> So I updated to 1401 on my z390 Maximus Hero (WIFI) and i cannot get my old settings to work... no matter what I try I can get the ram to 4266 like with 1301, it will not boot in the bios update list stated memory compatilibty fixed but I still cant boot with the new 1401 bios... BTW I reset the bios back to 1301 and my settings work 100%
> 
> what is it with the new bios 1401 some memory bug maybe???? let me know if anyone else is experiencing this,.
> 
> 
> heres my components
> i9 9900kf @ 5ghz 1.32Vcore on a Corsair h150i Pro
> 32GB DDR4 @ 4266mhz 17 18 18 38 1.5vdimm
> RTX 2080 TI
> ASUS Maximus Hero z390 WIFI
> 2TB 660p Intel NVMe
> EVGA 750w GQ PSU



just flash back to 1301. I would not expect any settings to carry forward to a new bios... best to "zero-base" the overlcock when using a new bios. I view it as only lucky if old bios settings work the same on a new bios.


----------



## l Nuke l

anyone have experience with pll bandwidth on the apex? I know its the cpu plls oc voltage. i know this because i tried pll bandwidth 1, 2, and 3 and monitored hwinfo to see what voltages changed and that was the only one. What does this voltage effect?


----------



## Falkentyne

l Nuke l said:


> anyone have experience with pll bandwidth on the apex? I know its the cpu plls oc voltage. i know this because i tried pll bandwidth 1, 2, and 3 and monitored hwinfo to see what voltages changed and that was the only one. What does this voltage effect?


Cold bug LN2 stuff. Keep it at 0 or around 1.20v.


----------



## l Nuke l

Falkentyne said:


> l Nuke l said:
> 
> 
> 
> anyone have experience with pll bandwidth on the apex? I know its the cpu plls oc voltage. i know this because i tried pll bandwidth 1, 2, and 3 and monitored hwinfo to see what voltages changed and that was the only one. What does this voltage effect?
> 
> 
> 
> Cold bug LN2 stuff. Keep it at 0 or around 1.20v.
Click to expand...

 Right now I have it at 3 and it reads 1.016v. thanks.


----------



## Falkentyne

l Nuke l said:


> Right now I have it at 3 and it reads 1.016v. thanks.


0 should be 1.20v on a Maximus XI board.
I think the previous versions set voltages that don't read correctly.

A PLL OC voltage of 1.016v is impossible. it would cause an instant clock watchdog timeout if you set something like that.


----------



## l Nuke l

Falkentyne said:


> l Nuke l said:
> 
> 
> 
> Right now I have it at 3 and it reads 1.016v. thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> 0 should be 1.20v on a Maximus XI board.
> I think the previous versions set voltages that don't read correctly.
> 
> A PLL OC voltage of 1.016v is impossible. it would cause an instant clock watchdog timeout if you set something like that.
Click to expand...

 i tried ppl bandwidth of 0-5. 0 read 0.6v, 1 read 0.8v, 2 read 1.0v, 3 read 1.016v, 4 read 1.168v, and 5 read 1.320v. this is on a maximus 10 apex.


----------



## Falkentyne

l Nuke l said:


> i tried ppl bandwidth of 0-5. 0 read 0.6v, 1 read 0.8v, 2 read 1.0v, 3 read 1.016v, 4 read 1.168v, and 5 read 1.320v. this is on a maximus 10 apex.


Yeah I know. It's reporting wrong values. It is reporting 'half' of the real value. So leave it at 0.
The Maximus XI boards report this correctly. E.g. PLL Bandwidth=0 is 1.20v CPU PLLs OC.


----------



## l Nuke l

Falkentyne said:


> l Nuke l said:
> 
> 
> 
> i tried ppl bandwidth of 0-5. 0 read 0.6v, 1 read 0.8v, 2 read 1.0v, 3 read 1.016v, 4 read 1.168v, and 5 read 1.320v. this is on a maximus 10 apex.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I know. It's reporting wrong values. It is reporting 'half' of the real value. So leave it at 0.
> The Maximus XI boards report this correctly. E.g. PLL Bandwidth=0 is 1.20v CPU PLLs OC.
Click to expand...

 interesting. thanks for that.


----------



## l Nuke l

not sure if this is all maximus 10 boards but my apex auto sets cpu standby voltage to 1.5v when i set 5.3ghz on the core and 5.0ghz on the cache @ 1.45vcore. So i have to manually set standby voltage to 1.2v


----------



## robertr1

@elmor In the various vrm setting options in the XI Apex, is there's a "sweet spot?" 

I've tried the following:
52/47x on cpu
1.31v fixed llc 6
p95 small non avx and occt large/avx2

The combos I tried:
manual/500/extreme/extreme
manual/1000/extreme/extreme
auto/extreme/extreme
auto/t.probe/daily

None of them make a different in letting me reduce vcore and all require 1.31v to be stable in those benchmarks.

Thus I was curious if there's a combo I'm missing.


----------



## l Nuke l

robertr1 said:


> @elmor In the various vrm setting options in the XI Apex, is there's a "sweet spot?"
> 
> I've tried the following:
> 52/47x on cpu
> 1.31v fixed llc 6
> p95 small non avx and occt large/avx2
> 
> The combos I tried:
> manual/500/extreme/extreme
> manual/1000/extreme/extreme
> auto/extreme/extreme
> auto/t.probe/daily
> 
> None of them make a different in letting me reduce vcore and all require 1.31v to be stable in those benchmarks.
> 
> Thus I was curious if there's a combo I'm missing.


try llc 5. seems to be the most efficient and effective llc measured with a oscilloscope. you might have to increase vcore slightly in bios from what u had set on llc6 but ull see ur load vcore will be lower.


----------



## robertr1

l Nuke l said:


> try llc 5. seems to be the most efficient and effective llc measured with a oscilloscope. you might have to increase vcore slightly in bios from what u had set on llc6 but ull see ur load vcore will be lower.


I don't want to idle that high for 5.3. With fixed I can do 1.37v llc6 for 53/48, dont want idle at 1.40+


----------



## l Nuke l

robertr1 said:


> l Nuke l said:
> 
> 
> 
> try llc 5. seems to be the most efficient and effective llc measured with a oscilloscope. you might have to increase vcore slightly in bios from what u had set on llc6 but ull see ur load vcore will be lower.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't want to idle that high for 5.3. With fixed I can do 1.37v llc6 for 53/48, dont want idle at 1.40+
Click to expand...

 easier to direct you to his videos than tryning to explain it here. start at 3:00 https://youtu.be/zyQSHJtTARU


----------



## robertr1

l Nuke l said:


> easier to direct you to his videos than tryning to explain it here. start at 3:00 https://youtu.be/zyQSHJtTARU


I've watched most of BZ's video and followed along with Elmor's detailed analysis of the gene here: 
https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/

3 factors:
- The Apex has a different VRM setup than the gene
- No such analysis of the XI Apex has been made public by anyone
- Still doesn't answer my initial query of a "sweet spot" for the VRM settings in the bios


----------



## l Nuke l

robertr1 said:


> l Nuke l said:
> 
> 
> 
> easier to direct you to his videos than tryning to explain it here. start at 3:00 https://youtu.be/zyQSHJtTARU
> 
> 
> 
> I've watched most of BZ's video and followed along with Elmor's detailed analysis of the gene here:
> https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/
> 
> 3 factors:
> - The Apex has a different VRM setup than the gene
> - No such analysis of the XI Apex has been made public by anyone
> - Still doesn't answer my initial query of a "sweet spot" for the VRM settings in the bios
Click to expand...

 good points. I max out all the vrm settings in bios as im only concerned with performance.I run, manual - 1000 - extreme - extreme and slap a 140mm fan over the vrms. my setup is on an open bench table. this is in an M10Apex.


----------



## DarthFK

Final (hopefully final) update on Asus post-sale service in my two cases:

1. As some of you might remember I bricked the BIOS on an Asus z390-e that I bought off ebay and sent it to Asus. The board was under warranty and Asus did not ask for the proof of purchase. Their service, however, claimed "liquid damage" from traces of non-conductive(!) thermal paste residue on the board, removed by me previously with non-conductive(!) isopropyl. Nothing related to my BIOS problem - apparently, they did not even start the BIOS/UEFI diagnostics, because they noted what they claimed to be "liquid damage". I initiated a dispute - there is such an option in the process - which seemed to be moving towards Asus sending me the board back unrepaired. They they told me that they fixed it - and then they told me that they didn't. Carefully reading my options, I saw that I can (and did) ultimately address the CEO's office with pictures taken before sending the board to Asus service as a proof, as well as indicating that thermal paste and isopropyl are non-conductive, which means that their service claim is B$ and remind them that the board was sent for BIOS reflashing, not physical damage... The CEO's office accepted my arguments, I was issued a replacement board that came with a piece of crumb in the socket... I then wrote back to the CEO's office, with pictures of the crumb, and they sent me again another RMA and a shipping label, and after two months of back and forth I got a brand new replacement.

2. I later purchased another z170 Pro Gaming Aura board, which was dead and I was out of return period on ebay. The board SN number during purchase was not shown - I only saw and verified the SN number on the box. Turned out the box was from a different identical board. I contacted Asus to verify my SN warranty and options. FYI - while online the warranty check showed that it is out of warranty, when asked the rep told me they have a Plus 3 months shelf time warranty to be added to that deadline. I think it's good to know, if anyone needs it. I've sent the board in, indicated that I have not used the board one single day and kindly asked for Asus help in getting it repaired. I got a message about an update - customer induced damage again, then without any other warning it was changed to "in repair" in a few days. This is purer luck. I got the board, but one of 10 side Aura LEDs was missing and another was dead - otherwise the board was fully functional. I replied to the customer support, thanking them for fixing the board, informing them about the problem and asking if they could initiate an RMA and pay for the return shipment, as they did not verify the board upon sending. I also suggested that while grateful, I would be happy avoiding contacting the CEO'
s office on this matter. Then, while I did not contact the, CEO's office reached out to me again, sending me an RMA and shipping label. Upon my question I was informed that they monitor the clients who previously addressed the CEO. :0 Well, I sent it - then I got a message "there is an update" - I checked the RMA on their replacement board that was functioning only partly and... the tech updated it with "Out of Warranty of Customer Induced Damage". The steam in my eyes was raising and trying to escape through my ears;] I was furious. Wrote to CEO's office. The dude replied that when he had a look it was showing that the board is already swapped. I now got a fully working board, looking like new, thanks to the guy who was in touch with me in both cases.

Observations:

Overarching advise from JPMboy was - don't buy from eBay to avoid trouble. However, particularly in case of older socket/chipsets, we do. And sht happens, with old and even with new systems bought from the store. If you're out of return period, you're facing Asus anyway, hence it's best to know what to expect. Out of about 15 boards I bough from ebay, "only" these two from Asus were problematic. Maybe I was lucky and got only two duds. But, if you have to address Asus support for your mobo, here are some basic pointers:

1. Don't forget to have a cap over the CPU socket, otherwise you'll most probably be denied warranty without even going further. Keep the accessories, don't send them over - that's in the RMA, but still good to know. There are other, few, things to consider:
a. Again, Asus does not send the replacement boards with accessories, so do keep your old ones. 
b. The original box may be gone by the end of the process, but you'll get a generic white/brown box instead. 
c. Be mindful of your mail "reception" area, in case it's less safe - the box may have either Asus written on it (in my 1st case it did), or the word "motherboard" (in my 2nd case it was the "motherboard"). In both cases this may be "inviting" for some other people.

2. Bent pins is Customer Induced Damage, you'll have to pay. If you have the proof that you bought the board for a lesser price, there is an option to dispute the repair price on that account. Otherwise, with bent pins, blown caps, or other visible or less visible, but truly and obviously Customer Induced Damage, be ready to pay something - as I noted above, the real question is how much.

3. You must take pictures of the board you have issues with right before sending it to Asus. The tech support may (or may not) mark it Out of Warranty (OOW) + Customer Induced Damage (CID). You never know. In my case they initially did that with both boards, but then in one case changed it by themselves, without any info or contact. If they do mark it CID, the only way to prove that the socket did not have bent pins is to have the pictures. Perhaps even with time stamps. Remember, Asus is a business that doesn't want to operate at a loss.

4. Be prepared to counter their CID and quote that will be sent via a different email with both pictures and solid arguments, if such arguments exist. Otherwise see point 2.

5. Twice they sent me replacement boards with defects. Their first level QC seems to be lacking. 

6. Extended times to deal with the lacking QC means possible months of repair. Be prepared for that - you might get things fixed in 2-3 weeks, but you may also have a couple of months till things get sorted out.

7. If you need to dispute and you feel that there is conflicting information coming form Asus, consider from the outset that the written communication is proof. Phone calls are not. Using email complaints might be better than calling - I had really bad experience with conflicting calls and emails.

8. If you are in such a bad place that things don't go well, and you feel that you are right and have the needed proof - contact the CEO's office, before Service Dept sends you the board back. This is the last resort.

9. Be aware that after the first address to the CEO's office, you'll be on CEO's monitoring list from that point on. I don't know if this is a "black list" or just the list of former customers. In my case, I had solid proof and it was a "good list". But you might consider that there could be easily a black list too.

Otherwise - Happy 2020 and good luck in the years to come!


----------



## robertr1

l Nuke l said:


> good points. I max out all the vrm settings in bios as im only concerned with performance.I run, manual - 1000 - extreme - extreme and slap a 140mm fan over the vrms. my setup is on an open bench table. this is in an M10Apex.


I do the same. Running 1000/extreme/extreme. I noticed a slight transient improvements going to 800khz on Elmor's graphs on the Gene so figured that applies here also. Hopefully Elmor can chime in at some point.


----------



## Chobbit

Need a bit of help, just built a new computer with a ROG Maximus XI Hero and 9900k. Installed everything outside of the case onto an m.2 drive fine, it post, I installed Windows and updated all of my driver's from Asus' site, great.

I did this without a GPU and just used the onboard HDMI port. Put everything in the case (still without a GPU) and when I've powered on the screen didn't come on and the board give a Q code of 40 (which is apparently something to do with the computer being in sleep/hibernation mode when I looked but it usually didn't affect getting an image on the monitor).

Cleared the CMOS even though the only thing I changed in bios was turned CMS on for when I put my other drives in, this time the board light stays on that suggests there's a boot problem and gives a Q code of A2 (IDE boot issue) but there's only the m.2 installed.

Any ideas? As it's really annoying me that it worked fine when tested outside of the case. Cheers.


----------



## Falkentyne

Chobbit said:


> Need a bit of help, just built a new computer with a ROG Maximus XI Hero and 9900k. Installed everything outside of the case onto an m.2 drive fine, it post, I installed Windows and updated all of my driver's from Asus' site, great.
> 
> I did this without a GPU and just used the onboard HDMI port. Put everything in the case (still without a GPU) and when I've powered on the screen didn't come on and the board give a Q code of 40 (which is apparently something to do with the computer being in sleep/hibernation mode when I looked but it usually didn't affect getting an image on the monitor).
> 
> Cleared the CMOS even though the only thing I changed in bios was turned CMS on for when I put my other drives in, this time the board light stays on that suggests there's a boot problem and gives a Q code of A2 (IDE boot issue) but there's only the m.2 installed.
> 
> Any ideas? As it's really annoying me that it worked fine when tested outside of the case. Cheers.


Take everything out of the case again and re-test.
If it then works, check for motherboard standoff and grounding and shorting issues. Also make sure your M.2 drives are actually fully completely inserted. Check CPU socket and make sure there is proper pressure and no overtightening. Check RAM slots. Check case jumper connections.


----------



## Chobbit

Falkentyne said:


> Take everything out of the case again and re-test.
> If it then works, check for motherboard standoff and grounding and shorting issues. Also make sure your M.2 drives are actually fully completely inserted. Check CPU socket and make sure there is proper pressure and no overtightening. Check RAM slots. Check case jumper connections.


Thanks for the reply, so when I posted last night I was a bit fed up as it was about 6 hours straight of work and it was working then wasn't, that I gave up and went to bed as soon as I left my message here. 

However when I woke up I thought before I start taking anything out I would try a few things as everything else was booting fine on the board. So I thought I would try and ignore not having a screen and try resetting the bios, so I know I restarted kept pressing DEL till I could see the Q-Code was saying it was in the bios then F7 to switch to EZ mode, F5 to restore default settings and F10 to save.

It then booted to an AO Q Code which meant it was getting into windows fine but still nothing on the monitor. Luckily I had the other monitor from my other system so plugged that in with displayport and it came instantly on. So just need to find out whats going on with the HDMI and the other monitor as it was working fine on that monitor before putting it in the case.


----------



## Shawnb99

What is the best way to repair bent pins? I bent a couple in my XI Formula and had it in storage since I figured it was a write off.
Will ASUS RMA fix that or is the board basically dead to me?

Haven’t been successful in giving the pins myself so unsure what to do now.


----------



## l Nuke l

Shawnb99 said:


> What is the best way to repair bent pins? I bent a couple in my XI Formula and had it in storage since I figured it was a write off.
> Will ASUS RMA fix that or is the board basically dead to me?
> 
> Havenâ€™️t been successful in giving the pins myself so unsure what to do now.


With precision electronics tweezers. one by one.


----------



## smilinjohn

Chobbit said:


> Thanks for the reply, so when I posted last night I was a bit fed up as it was about 6 hours straight of work and it was working then wasn't, that I gave up and went to bed as soon as I left my message here.
> 
> However when I woke up I thought before I start taking anything out I would try a few things as everything else was booting fine on the board. So I thought I would try and ignore not having a screen and try resetting the bios, so I know I restarted kept pressing DEL till I could see the Q-Code was saying it was in the bios then F7 to switch to EZ mode, F5 to restore default settings and F10 to save.
> 
> It then booted to an AO Q Code which meant it was getting into windows fine but still nothing on the monitor. Luckily I had the other monitor from my other system so plugged that in with displayport and it came instantly on. So just need to find out whats going on with the HDMI and the other monitor as it was working fine on that monitor before putting it in the case.



That Q code (AO) will go away after a reboot. Mine shows that when I remove the computer from a power source, like when I work on it or move it across the room.




Shawnb99 said:


> What is the best way to repair bent pins? I bent a couple in my XI Formula and had it in storage since I figured it was a write off.
> Will ASUS RMA fix that or is the board basically dead to me?
> 
> Haven’t been successful in giving the pins myself so unsure what to do now.



If you send it into Asus they'll charge you to fix it, it'll be classified as customer induced damage.


----------



## Shawnb99

smilinjohn said:


> If you send it into Asus they'll charge you to fix it, it'll be classified as customer induced damage.




Kinda figured. Any idea how much?


----------



## Jpmboy

Shawnb99 said:


> What is the best way to repair bent pins? I bent a couple in my XI Formula and had it in storage since I figured it was a write off.
> Will ASUS RMA fix that or is the board basically dead to me?
> 
> Haven’t been successful in giving the pins myself so unsure what to do now.


a 5mm mechanical pencil tip works... as does a steady hand and strong magnifiers.


----------



## smilinjohn

Shawnb99 said:


> Kinda figured. Any idea how much?



No Idea, best guess is that they would either replace the entire socket, or give you a trade in price to have the entire board swapped.


Keep an eye on your PM I'll send you a number.


----------



## Shawnb99

smilinjohn said:


> No Idea, best guess is that they would either replace the entire socket, or give you a trade in price to have the entire board swapped.
> 
> 
> Keep an eye on your PM I'll send you a number.




Thanks


----------



## DarthFK

Shawnb99 said:


> Thanks


From some of the previous reading during my RMAs (they wrote to me that they would charge me as CID in the first case, but I preempted that), the price can vary, and sometimes can go up to the full price on the mobo or close to that. However, there was an option there to dispute the CID as such or to dispute the amount quoted, something around the idea "the purchase price was lower" or something like that. I am speculating, but if you could find either a proof of purchase lower, or even a current ebay price for a used mobo (or even a damaged one), you can try your luck. Bent pins are certainly classified as Customer Induced Damage, but depending on what they perceive as difficulty and time needed to complete, I would have a hard time predicting their quote (which, presumably, can vary from $80 to $280 and, again, I am wildly speculating with these numbers, as $80 would be a less plausible scenario, I think)


----------



## chibi

z390 Apex XI here with Trident Z Royals. Is there a mobo BIOS setting to disable the rgb on the ram only? I like to keep the mobo leds on white. 

I've only been successful to turn off the ram RGB with the gskill software. But it requires a service in windows and only turns it off once windows is loaded.

Thanks!


----------



## smilinjohn

chibi said:


> z390 Apex XI here with Trident Z Royals. Is there a mobo BIOS setting to disable the rgb on the ram only? I like to keep the mobo leds on white.
> 
> I've only been successful to turn off the ram RGB with the gskill software. But it requires a service in windows and only turns it off once windows is loaded.
> 
> Thanks!



You can disable just the ram with armoury crate.


----------



## chibi

smilinjohn said:


> You can disable just the ram with armoury crate.



I don't have armoury crate installed, trying to cut down on all unecessary bloatware.


----------



## smilinjohn

chibi said:


> I don't have armoury crate installed, trying to cut down on all unecessary bloatware.


Just a suggestion, it's the only way I know of...

You could try to take off the heat-sinks and see if it can be disabled. The only other way I know of to turn off just the ram LED lighting is to buy ram that doesn't have LED lighting:thumb:

Sorry I just don't understand this mindset. I get it if it's some crappy resource hungry anti-malware application, or a third party application that really has no business running in the background like Steam when I'm not playing a game, or my qBittorrent program that starts by default when Windows boots unless you disable that behavior, it doesn't need to be running unless I'm DLing something. These can be shut off by using msconfig or the apps settings. But not installing a lighting control application from the manufacture that I can use to control the lighting from my desktop, or the software for my sound-card because it's "bloatware"??? They don't take up that much resource wise nor do they take up that much space on my C: drive I have games MUCH larger than Armoury Crate. Geeze it's not like I can't watch a movie while I use Excel, Word (with multiple instances of it sometimes as many as 10), look at the Power Points my professors post AND surf on the internet with 15 or 20 tabs open to get my research for class done (yes I do ALL of this simultaneously) because Armoury Crate makes my video stutter, reduces my FPS, or screws with my internet connection...

Personally I think you can take such things a tad to far, but then I don't use a computer half as hard as a lot of people here I'm sure. 

Just my .02


----------



## Jpmboy

chibi said:


> z390 Apex XI here with Trident Z Royals. Is there a mobo BIOS setting to disable the rgb on the ram only? I like to keep the mobo leds on white.
> 
> I've only been successful to turn off the ram RGB with the gskill software. But it requires a service in windows and only turns it off once windows is loaded.
> 
> Thanks!


yeah, set it to ALL OFF in bios under Advanced> . THe sticks will light until OS handoff. Asus Aura is what you need to also set to OFF under "shutdown". AFAIK, can't disable the LEDs until after POST.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

chibi said:


> I don't have armoury crate installed, trying to cut down on all unecessary bloatware.


Exactly the same reason I didn't install it and stuck with the same red rgb. ram is stuck with the RGB cycling, may look at a non RBG set next week.
Kind of over this RGB thing.


----------



## chibi

smilinjohn said:


> You could try to take off the heat-sinks and see if it can be disabled. The only other way I know of to turn off just the ram LED lighting is to buy ram that doesn't have LED lighting:thumb:
> 
> Just my .02


GSkill 4800 c18 doesn't come without rgb. This kit was needed for best overclocking capabilities. The rest of your post is irrelevant.



Jpmboy said:


> yeah, set it to ALL OFF in bios under Advanced> . THe sticks will light until OS handoff. Asus Aura is what you need to also set to OFF under "shutdown". AFAIK, can't disable the LEDs until after POST.


Tried that, it turns everything off including the mobo LEDs. I don't mind the mobo ones, just the ram to keep heat down for maximum overclock.



schoolofmonkey said:


> Exactly the same reason I didn't install it and stuck with the same red rgb. ram is stuck with the RGB cycling, may look at a non RBG set next week.
> Kind of over this RGB thing.


Hoping they put out higher binned ram without RGB going forward.


----------



## Jpmboy

chibi said:


> Tried that, it turns everything off including the mobo LEDs. I don't mind the mobo ones, just the ram to keep heat down for maximum overclock.


You want the mobo lights on while doing a max overclock? 
Put a fan on the RGB sticks if that's the issue. My Royals 4800c18 kit runs fine with the rgb enabled. When I run them at 1.9V I switch all lights off.


----------



## chibi

Jpmboy said:


> You want the mobo lights on while doing a max overclock?
> Put a fan on the RGB sticks if that's the issue. My Royals 4800c17 kity runs fine with the rgb enabled. When I run them at 1.9V I switch all lights off.



Hehe, that's right. I want my cake and icecream! 

I ended up turning off all the LEDs. I can't see the ram RGB anyways from the cpu cooler (D15) so it was just extra heat.


----------



## jeffk

Has anyone noticed that Q-fan Step up / down speed are completly ignored ? So the CPU Fan / Case fan are waving when the CPU temp spike just for second, when browsing for example.

(Q-fan Bios setting without AI suit)


----------



## Nizzen

Jpmboy said:


> You want the mobo lights on while doing a max overclock?
> Put a fan on the RGB sticks if that's the issue. My Royals 4800c17 kity runs fine with the rgb enabled. When I run them at 1.9V I switch all lights off.


4800c17? Is it an unreleased kit, or did you mean 4800c18?


----------



## Jpmboy

Nizzen said:


> 4800c17? Is it an unreleased kit, or did you mean 4800c18?


sorry bro - 4800c18, not 17. 
No posting about unreleased kits... until they are released.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> You want the mobo lights on while doing a max overclock?
> Put a fan on the RGB sticks if that's the issue. My Royals 4800c18 kit runs fine with the rgb enabled. When I run them at 1.9V I switch all lights off.



@*Jpmboy* 

You own a Maximus XI Extreme I think, what kind of memory overclock you getting with 4x8GB?


----------



## KedarWolf

Jpmboy said:


> sorry bro - 4800c18, not 17.
> No posting about unreleased kits... until they are released.


Never mind the Extreme question, on your Apex XI can you turn off the RAM RGB from the BIOS?

Oh, I'm going with the Apex XI, G.Skill 4800, the CL 17 if they are available by the second week of March or CL18 if not, and getting a 9900ks.
May the CPU lottery gods smile upon me, or can someone sacrifice a goat at least? 

Edit: what do you use for cooling your CPU with your Apex XI, @Jpmboy the capacitors around the CPU made direct die impossible with my velocity and heatkiller vi pro blocks.  can I use the blocks if I don't delid my 9900ks? Or are the capacitors too high still.


----------



## Jpmboy

KedarWolf said:


> Never mind the Extreme question, on your Apex XI can you turn off the RAM RGB from the BIOS?
> 
> Oh, I'm going with the Apex XI, G.Skill 4800, the CL 17 if they are available by the second week of March or CL18 if not, and getting a 9900ks.
> May the CPU lottery gods smile upon me, or can someone sacrifice a goat at least?
> 
> Edit: what do you use for cooling your CPU with your Apex XI, @Jpmboy the capacitors around the CPU made direct die impossible with my velocity and heatkiller vi pro blocks.  can I use the blocks if I don't delid my 9900ks? Or are the capacitors too high still.


Sorry Bro - My Max XI is playing an away game (with deployed nephew) and I have not had an Apex XI. I only have one 1151 board - the Apex X. 
Check the dimensions of the New blocks from Optimus Cooling. realy high quality stuff with really clean machining. I'm running their V2 on the R6EO and it's really a top performer. I have their Foundation block - excellent stuff.


----------



## chibi

KedarWolf said:


> Edit: what do you use for cooling your CPU with your Apex XI, @Jpmboy the capacitors around the CPU made direct die impossible with my velocity and heatkiller vi pro blocks.  can I use the blocks if I don't delid my 9900ks? Or are the capacitors too high still.



Can you post pictures of where the issue is with direct die and water blocks? I have the Apex XI and 9900KS and am thinking about going direct die in the future.


----------



## jeffk

jeffk said:


> Has anyone noticed that Q-fan Step up / down speed are completly ignored ? So the CPU Fan / Case fan are waving when the CPU temp spike just for second, when browsing for example.
> 
> (Q-fan Bios setting without AI suit)



No one ?


----------



## Shawnb99

KedarWolf said:


> Never mind the Extreme question, on your Apex XI can you turn off the RAM RGB from the BIOS?
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, I'm going with the Apex XI, G.Skill 4800, the CL 17 if they are available by the second week of March or CL18 if not, and getting a 9900ks.
> 
> May the CPU lottery gods smile upon me, or can someone sacrifice a goat at least?
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: what do you use for cooling your CPU with your Apex XI, @Jpmboy the capacitors around the CPU made direct die impossible with my velocity and heatkiller vi pro blocks.  can I use the blocks if I don't delid my 9900ks? Or are the capacitors too high still.




You have to use the goofy mount for the Heatkiller IV. If you go with the Optimus block you can mount it the normal way without issues.
Direct die or not the mounting is the same


----------



## Jpmboy

jeffk said:


> No one ?


the hysteresis works from bios on the Apex X, Apex VI and R6EO here.


----------



## Apothysis

KedarWolf said:


> Edit: what do you use for cooling your CPU with your Apex XI, @*Jpmboy* the capacitors around the CPU made direct die impossible with my velocity and heatkiller vi pro blocks.  can I use the blocks if I don't delid my 9900ks? Or are the capacitors too high still.





chibi said:


> Can you post pictures of where the issue is with direct die and water blocks? I have the Apex XI and 9900KS and am thinking about going direct die in the future.



If you two still need some feedback on direct die on the Apex XI I've now had both an EK Velocity Strike and an Optimus Foundation block on mine, direct die, 0 issues


----------



## chibi

Apothysis said:


> If you two still need some feedback on direct die on the Apex XI I've now had both an EK Velocity Strike and an Optimus Foundation block on mine, direct die, 0 issues



Did you use the Rockitcool direct die bracket? Or another brand? Any before/after comparison?


----------



## Apothysis

chibi said:


> Did you use the Rockitcool direct die bracket? Or another brand? Any before/after comparison?


Using Der8auers frame. I changed out a radiator, my fans and redid my entire loop so it's not a direct comparison, but I'd say the Optimus Foundation-block runs about 2-3c cooler than the EK Velocity Strike - lines up with the TPU-review. Sadly I didn't have a water temp monitor in my loop before to do a better comparison.


----------



## Apothysis

To anyone currently using the Maximus XI Apex: Increasing the VRM Switching Frequency can have a negative impact on your stability:

I encourage you to test this on your own to eliminate the possibility of my particular board being messed up, my setup was as follows:
50/47 Core/Cache, RAM @ JEDEC, Prime95 Small FFT AVX2 just below minimum stable voltage (at 500 KHz). I did the tests at LLC5 with Power Duty Control and Power Phase Control on Extreme.


----------



## Falkentyne

Apothysis said:


> To anyone currently using the Maximus XI Apex: Increasing the VRM Switching Frequency can have a negative impact on your stability:
> 
> I encourage you to test this on your own to eliminate the possibility of my particular board being messed up, my setup was as follows:
> 50/47 Core/Cache, RAM @ JEDEC, Prime95 Small FFT AVX2 just below minimum stable voltage (at 500 KHz). I did the tests at LLC5 with Power Duty Control and Power Phase Control on Extreme.


You need to start this test with a switching frequency that does NOT crash threads nor generate CPU Cache L0 errors at all, and then go up.
If you're getting a BSOD, you're already past the unstable vcore point even long before that.
I don't know what auto sets, but I assume 300 or 400 khz is lowest? Use the lowest one and find the vcore where no crashes or L0's happen then start increasing the switching frequency.

BTW the same issue happens on the Aorus Master and Xtreme, also.

I also believe that if you keep Vcore LLC (Loadline calibration) at Intel spec (I believe this is level 2 on your board, which should be 1.6 mOhms), possibly in combination with Auto vcore or adaptive /offset (you will NEED to raise AC Loadline to 1.6 mOhms if you use such a weak LLC), higher switching frequencies will not worsen stability. You don't want to use a fixed vcore with Level 2 LLC since vdroop will be massive and AC Loadline won't save you. You would probably need a 1.4v+ bios set voltage to keep load vcore high enough.


----------



## DarthFK

Help needed!!! My son's 9700k with his Gigabyte z390 Aorus Ultra mobo died yesterday. Now, after cross-testing his MB & CPU with mines, I have issues with my 9700k on my Asus X Hero Wifi mobo (codes CC then 55 despite BIOS flashbacks, reseating the CPU and cooler or 1 stick of RAM tried in different slots). Here is a more detailed description and I would appreciate any advice:

1. I saw that my son's PC restarted mid-game. Turned out that his CPU (9700k @5GHZ -2AVX 1.34vcore on an 240mm AIO) was overheating due to caked paste and dust, as he neglected to clean his PC. We did a cleaning (dusting off with canned air etc), took out everything. 

After cleaning I tested his CPU+MB+GPU+SSD and RAM outside of his case, on the mobo box. All was ok, including temps with the temporarily reconnected AIO. 

My youngest son then reconnected everything in the case, it posted ok, but as it turned out, some of RGBs on fans wouldn't light up. We shut it down, reconnected the rgb headers properly & verified all cables. Upon startup it just lit upand then went dead. Caps are not blown, nothing seems to be out of order, no bent pins.

2. Took out the following components from his rig and tested them with an i7-6700 & Asus Z170ProGaming:
- PSU (EVGA 850G3) - works fine.
- RAM (G.Skill 3600c17 2x8Gb) - works.
- GPU (MSI Trio x 1080ti) - works.
- SSD (Team Group RGB 1Tb) - works.
- AIO Fractal Celsius 24 - works.

This left either the CPU or the motherboard as the culprit, or both.

3. So, I then tried testing these (confirmed working) components with his MB & CPU outside of the case and it wouldn't even boot. Two or three clicks come from PSU, then RAM rgb would lit up, but that's it.

Both his CPU & mobo seem to be dead.

4. I then took my own 9700k out of my Asus mobo and tried to boot my CPU with his Gigabyte mobo. No luck. I then placed his 9700k into my Asus X Hero - no boot. This seems to confirm that both his MB and CPU are dead.

5. The problem now is that I placed my 9700k back into Asus z370 Maximus X Hero wifi, cleared CMOS and:
- got straight into F1 Bios setup. When in BIOS, it froze. 
- Restart, freeze in BIOS again. 
- I shut it down, disconnected the psu cable, pressed the power button for almost 2min. Then tried to start it and got errors CC and while waiting for a minute the CC error went into error 55. 
- BIOS reflash with clear CMOS did not help, pulling battery and clearing CMOS on the battery socket contacts did not help, discharging capacitors & reflashing BIOS & clearing CMOS didn't help. 
- Reseating the CPU & cooler, not overtightening the cooler screws, one stick of RAM, in each slot, all tried - I still get errors CC, which later "transforms" into 55. 

Taking into account the evolution of the problems, I don't think that this is an Asus error, but I would appreciate your ideas and advise:

A. Can I do something else on my Asus mobo?

B. Is there a chance that the Gigabyte board killed or damaged both CPUs?

C. If the CPUs were damaged by the mobo, should I contact Gigabyte about it & are there any ideas about it? Or Intel?

Any useful info or ideas would be great. We're both sitting now without our PCs in this PAUSE self-quarantine in NY looking at each other in disbelief. Two PCs dead in one day. 

Thank you all in advance!


----------



## Falkentyne

DarthFK said:


> Help needed!!! My son's 9700k with his Gigabyte z390 Aorus Ultra mobo died yesterday. Now, after cross-testing his MB & CPU with mines, I have issues with my 9700k on my Asus X Hero Wifi mobo (codes CC then 55 despite BIOS flashbacks, reseating the CPU and cooler or 1 stick of RAM tried in different slots). Here is a more detailed description and I would appreciate any advice:
> 
> 1. I saw that my son's PC restarted mid-game. Turned out that his CPU (9700k @5GHZ -2AVX 1.34vcore on an 240mm AIO) was overheating due to caked paste and dust, as he neglected to clean his PC. We did a cleaning (dusting off with canned air etc), took out everything.
> 
> After cleaning I tested his CPU+MB+GPU+SSD and RAM outside of his case, on the mobo box. All was ok, including temps with the temporarily reconnected AIO.
> 
> My youngest son then reconnected everything in the case, it posted ok, but as it turned out, some of RGBs on fans wouldn't light up. We shut it down, reconnected the rgb headers properly & verified all cables. Upon startup it just lit upand then went dead. Caps are not blown, nothing seems to be out of order, no bent pins.
> 
> 2. Took out the following components from his rig and tested them with an i7-6700 & Asus Z170ProGaming:
> - PSU (EVGA 850G3) - works fine.
> - RAM (G.Skill 3600c17 2x8Gb) - works.
> - GPU (MSI Trio x 1080ti) - works.
> - SSD (Team Group RGB 1Tb) - works.
> - AIO Fractal Celsius 24 - works.
> 
> This left either the CPU or the motherboard as the culprit, or both.
> 
> 3. So, I then tried testing these (confirmed working) components with his MB & CPU outside of the case and it wouldn't even boot. Two or three clicks come from PSU, then RAM rgb would lit up, but that's it.
> 
> Both his CPU & mobo seem to be dead.
> 
> 4. I then took my own 9700k out of my Asus mobo and tried to boot my CPU with his Gigabyte mobo. No luck. I then placed his 9700k into my Asus X Hero - no boot. This seems to confirm that both his MB and CPU are dead.
> 
> 5. The problem now is that I placed my 9700k back into Asus z370 Maximus X Hero wifi, cleared CMOS and:
> - got straight into F1 Bios setup. When in BIOS, it froze.
> - Restart, freeze in BIOS again.
> - I shut it down, disconnected the psu cable, pressed the power button for almost 2min. Then tried to start it and got errors CC and while waiting for a minute the CC error went into error 55.
> - BIOS reflash with clear CMOS did not help, pulling battery and clearing CMOS on the battery socket contacts did not help, discharging capacitors & reflashing BIOS & clearing CMOS didn't help.
> - Reseating the CPU & cooler, not overtightening the cooler screws, one stick of RAM, in each slot, all tried - I still get errors CC, which later "transforms" into 55.
> 
> Taking into account the evolution of the problems, I don't think that this is an Asus error, but I would appreciate your ideas and advise:
> 
> A. Can I do something else on my Asus mobo?
> 
> B. Is there a chance that the Gigabyte board killed or damaged both CPUs?
> 
> C. If the CPUs were damaged by the mobo, should I contact Gigabyte about it & are there any ideas about it? Or Intel?
> 
> Any useful info or ideas would be great. We're both sitting now without our PCs in this PAUSE self-quarantine in NY looking at each other in disbelief. Two PCs dead in one day.
> 
> Thank you all in advance!


55 is "RAM detect" or something related to RAM training.
Looks like the Gigabyte board killed both CPU's.
You said you had your "youngest" son install the motherboard? Just how young was he? I hope this wasn't done on carpet?
Looks like something related to voltage regulation fried.


----------



## DarthFK

Yeah CC is BIOS & 55 is RAM. I tried BIOS reflashes and tried one stick of RAM in each of the 4 slots. No luck.

The youngest is 14yo. He just built under my supervision his Ryzen rig. He is the only one with a PC in the house now. Buggers.

Not on carpet, of course, to avoid static. The PC initially posted fine, but died after reconnecting the RgB headers that were not connected properly (this was the part I couldn't see over his shoulder). That was somewhat weird that it posted & went into Windows fine with fans spinning, but two fans had no RGB, then I reconnected the rgb headers properly (arrow to arrow) and it died "right". Further testing was done without those RGB fans/stuff.


----------



## DarthFK

Should I claim damage with Gigabyte?


----------



## Jpmboy

DarthFK said:


> Should I claim damage with Gigabyte?


Wouldn't it be best to ask that question in a Gigabyte thread?


----------



## DarthFK

Jpmboy said:


> DarthFK said:
> 
> 
> 
> Should I claim damage with Gigabyte?
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't it be best to ask that question in a Gigabyte thread?
Click to expand...

Definitely will, but it was also linked to my previous question if there are any ideas for the Asus CC (followed by 55) codes, before I contact Gigabyte thread and/or manufacturer directly or I exhausted my options on Asus?


----------



## Jpmboy

If I understand the problem history... The 55 code, assuming the ram is not bad, broken or in inserted properly means the POST check cannot verify that any ram is installed. Make sure it is inserted fully and that is no "gunk" in the trunk (slots). All settings on auto (best done in this case by clearing the CMOS). If you still get 55, and the ram stick (test only one at a time) is good in another rig, then it's the CPU. Also check for crap in the socket or bent pins.


----------



## DarthFK

Jpmboy said:


> If I understand the problem history... The 55 code, assuming the ram is not bad, broken or in inserted properly means the POST check cannot verify that any ram is installed. Make sure it is inserted fully and that is no "gunk" in the trunk (slots). All settings on auto (best done in this case by clearing the CMOS). If you still get 55, and the ram stick (test only one at a time) is good in another rig, then it's the CPU. Also check for crap in the socket or bent pins.


Thank you. I get first the CC code, then it switches to 55 after a while.

These codes started after I used my 9700k to test my son's Gigabyte z390 Aorus that went dead. After testing his mobo, I reinstalled the 9700k into Asus X Hero and it started to throw the CC code, followed by 55.

I used two RAM kits (16Gb 3600c17) and tested them on an i7-6700 & Asus z170 Pro Gaming combo. Both kits worked fine on the z170 platform. Definitely the RAM is fine. 

My Asus x Hero,the one throwing errors, board has no bent pins, no gunk in the socket or in the RAM slots. I made sure to clean the CPU with isopropyl alcohol and inspected it, to make sure it's clean, without any debris. Components in the middle of the CPU lga seem ok, none blown after my brief testing on the Gigabyte.

The Asus error codes only started after I attempted to test the 9700k on that Gigabyte z390 board.

I read other reports of CC error followed by 55 on Asus boards and most had cooler overtightening issues (topology related?). I made sure the cooler screws were not overtightened.

Did I miss something? If it booted into BIOS initially, but froze and then started throwing those errors, is there something I might be missing to reset the board or something else?


----------



## Jpmboy

You did clrcmos with the button on the back of the Hero?


----------



## DarthFK

Jpmboy said:


> You did clrcmos with the button on the back of the Hero?


Yes, and pulled the battery and shorted the contacts.

I am still wondering how did it post to BIOS the 1st time after getting the CPU back to the motherboard - but it did freeze in the BIOS. And then it threw those errors, but still... it was able to go up to the BIOS initially.


----------



## Jpmboy

DarthFK said:


> Yes, and pulled the battery and shorted the contacts.
> 
> I am still wondering how did it post to BIOS the 1st time after getting the CPU back to the motherboard - but it did freeze in the BIOS. And then it threw those errors, but still... it was able to go up to the BIOS initially.


So the CPU fails to post in two motherboards.... it's most probable that it is the CPU that's bad.


----------



## DarthFK

Jpmboy said:


> DarthFK said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and pulled the battery and shorted the contacts.
> 
> I am still wondering how did it post to BIOS the 1st time after getting the CPU back to the motherboard - but it did freeze in the BIOS. And then it threw those errors, but still... it was able to go up to the BIOS initially.
> 
> 
> 
> So the CPU fails to post in two motherboards.... it's most probable that it is the CPU that's bad.
Click to expand...

I was a bit hopeful after my 9700k was able to reach the BIOS initially, but then froze. It seems that I was too hopeful 😞

It's the first time when I see a mobo killing two CPUs. 

It's a side question, but if any of you ever had this happen, who should I contact and should I claim damage for both CPUs? Did anyone had such an experience?


----------



## Falkentyne

Jpmboy said:


> So the CPU fails to post in two motherboards.... it's most probable that it is the CPU that's bad.


The CPU was perfectly fine until he put it into the Gigabyte board.
So the GB board killed two CPU's.



DarthFK said:


> I was a bit hopeful after my 9700k was able to reach the BIOS initially, but then froze. It seems that I was too hopeful 😞
> 
> It's the first time when I see a mobo killing two CPUs.
> 
> It's a side question, but if any of you ever had this happen, who should I contact and should I claim damage for both CPUs? Did anyone had such an experience?


Did you buy Intel's Processor Replacement Plan? 
I suggest you buy that right now if it's still available. It would be Intel who replaces the processors. And that GB board needs to be RMA'd before it kills something else.


----------



## Jpmboy

Falkentyne said:


> The CPU was perfectly fine until he put it into the Gigabyte board.
> So the GB board killed two CPU's.


Bad mobo. :buttkick:


----------



## DarthFK

Falkentyne said:


> Did you buy Intel's Processor Replacement Plan?
> I suggest you buy that right now if it's still available. It would be Intel who replaces the processors. And that GB board needs to be RMA'd before it kills something else.


No, no replacement plan, regular Microcenter purchases. I was thinking that it should be withing warranty with Intel, without any additional replacement plans. Scratching my head, I was thinking to contact Gigabyte, under the impression that the MB manufacturer is responsible for the damage, so maybe they should replace the CPUs too (well...)

Anyway, one of my Asus related questions stemmed from the fact that after that GB board, I placed the CPU back into my Asus and got into BIOS, but it froze there, then the board threw CC (incomplete BIOS) and 55 (no RAM) errors. I thought that if the CPU would be broken it wouldn't be able to go into BIOS at all. Hence my attempts to troubleshoot on the Maximus board and trying BIOS flashback, etc, asking for any ideas.

If you have any additional thoughts about being able to enter into BIOS originally, but not now, let me know.

Thank you all for weighing in in the meantime!!!


----------



## DarthFK

Update of some sorts - I purchased locally an i3-9100f, reflashed the BIOS, cleared CMOS and my Asus Maximus X Hero board booted fine with it.

Then I cleared CMOS and tried the two 9700k and one still threw the CC and then 55 error, while the other threw 00 error (no CPU). 

At this point it is more than clear that there is no way that any of the 9700k would work on the Asus (or any board at all), even after my 9700k initially booted & froze in the BIOS, giving me some remote hope.

Thanks for the suggestion about the Intel Protection Plan @Falkentyne. Gigabyte replied that the CPUs are not their problem. I looked at the intel PTPP plan and for $20 it covers CPU death due to OCing. Well... unfortunately, Intel's website is having problems for the 2nd consecutive day (lol!), but I think I will be able to purchase it next days. This was a very good advise! Thanks!


----------



## dagan

So haven't been in overclocking game in a long while, last I was did was frist gen i7,
my questions are
1. Are my voltage and temp normal under current overclock looking at hwinfo screenshot I provided
2. First time offset option, Its been stable under blender tests with offset -130-LLC Level 3(heard vdroop is a good thing so I relaxed the LLC to 3), is offset better than fixed?
3. I have my pc connected to UPS and at stress test I was expecting a consistent wattage pull but it seems to fluctuate between 260 to 360, so it jumps 100 watts every half a tick(.5 second) or so, I'm monitoring cpu usage and its always at max during stress test and with xtu monitoring various throttle values nothing comes up throttling
4. I can just ignore my VID since I'm on offset, is that correct?

Thank you so much your help ahead of time. I just wanted some peace of mind regarding my set up and seeing the wattage jump all over the place made me feel a bit uneasy











Motherboard model:Fatal1ty Z370 Professional Gaming i7
UEFI Version: 4.20
CPU:i9 9900k
Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB: G.SKill F4-3600C15-8GTZ Quantity 4 of total 32 gb
GPU: 1080ti
PSU: Seasonic PRIME TX-850
CPU Cooler:Corsair h100i pro
Operating system: Win 10 Pro activated
Any third Party temp/voltage software installed:hwmonitor, icue, hwinfo64, intel xtu,
System Overclocked (provide details)? 5.0ghz offset -130, LLC Level 3


----------



## DarthFK

dagan said:


> So haven't been in overclocking game in a long while, last I was did was frist gen i7,
> my questions are
> 1. Are my voltage and temp normal under current overclock looking at hwinfo screenshot I provided
> 2. First time offset option, Its been stable under blender tests with offset -130-LLC Level 3(heard vdroop is a good thing so I relaxed the LLC to 3), is offset better than fixed?
> 3. I have my pc connected to UPS and at stress test I was expecting a consistent wattage pull but it seems to fluctuate between 260 to 360, so it jumps 100 watts every half a tick(.5 second) or so, I'm monitoring cpu usage and its always at max during stress test and with xtu monitoring various throttle values nothing comes up throttling
> 4. I can just ignore my VID since I'm on offset, is that correct?
> 
> Thank you so much your help ahead of time. I just wanted some peace of mind regarding my set up and seeing the wattage jump all over the place made me feel a bit uneasy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Motherboard model:Fatal1ty Z370 Professional Gaming i7
> UEFI Version: 4.20
> CPU:i9 9900k
> Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB: G.SKill F4-3600C15-8GTZ Quantity 4 of total 32 gb
> GPU: 1080ti
> PSU: Seasonic PRIME TX-850
> CPU Cooler:Corsair h100i pro
> Operating system: Win 10 Pro activated
> Any third Party temp/voltage software installed:hwmonitor, icue, hwinfo64, intel xtu,
> System Overclocked (provide details)? 5.0ghz offset -130, LLC Level 3


You're asking this on an Asus thread and you have an Asrock motherboard, which counts the vdroop/llc "backwards" (LLC1 being the highest on Asrock). I'd suggest you to address that on the AsRock thread or a separate thread on OCing. Otherwise, as a previous owner of a z370 Taichi, I would suggest you to use LLC2 or LL1, and I think your vcore is high (weed probably?)  

Ok, before you open your own thread or go to Asrock, go on youtube and search for Kapteeni Kuolio "i7 8700K 5Ghz & Memory Overclocking with Asrock Z370 Taichi Motherboard" - he OCs an 8700k on Asrock, as that is not a fundamentally different CPU, while the MB is practically identical, except vcore voltage on the 9900k should be lower.


----------



## Jpmboy

dagan said:


> So haven't been in overclocking game in a long while, last I was did was frist gen i7,
> my questions are
> 1. Are my voltage and temp normal under current overclock looking at hwinfo screenshot I provided
> 2. First time offset option, Its been stable under blender tests with offset -130-LLC Level 3(heard vdroop is a good thing so I relaxed the LLC to 3), is offset better than fixed?
> 3. I have my pc connected to UPS and at stress test I was expecting a consistent wattage pull but it seems to fluctuate between 260 to 360, so it jumps 100 watts every half a tick(.5 second) or so, I'm monitoring cpu usage and its always at max during stress test and with xtu monitoring various throttle values nothing comes up throttling
> 4. I can just ignore my VID since I'm on offset, is that correct?
> 
> Thank you so much your help ahead of time. I just wanted some peace of mind regarding my set up and seeing the wattage jump all over the place made me feel a bit uneasy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Motherboard model:Fatal1ty Z370 Professional Gaming i7
> UEFI Version: 4.20
> CPU:i9 9900k
> Memory kit part number (s) and amount in GB: G.SKill F4-3600C15-8GTZ Quantity 4 of total 32 gb
> GPU: 1080ti
> PSU: Seasonic PRIME TX-850
> CPU Cooler:Corsair h100i pro
> Operating system: Win 10 Pro activated
> Any third Party temp/voltage software installed:hwmonitor, icue, hwinfo64, intel xtu,
> System Overclocked (provide details)? 5.0ghz offset -130, LLC Level 3


yeah, that vcore is way too high for that frequency on that CPU. Most 9900Ks do 5.0 at under 1.3V. You should look for an AsRock or 9900K therad.


----------



## Norlig

I got the Asus ROG z390-f Gaming
My 9900k has recently been stuck at 5.1Ghz all the time.

It's not due to windows power options (minimum processor state set to 10%)
If I set maximum power state to less than 100%, the frequency does drop.

Tried updating the Bios.

I cant figure out what setting in Bios allows it to downclock at idle, or if its related to a program thats running. (Tried killing any running applications that seemed to not be system critical)

Anyone got any suggestions?

(pictures from before I updated the bios)


----------



## Jpmboy

Norlig said:


> I got the Asus ROG z390-f Gaming
> My 9900k has recently been stuck at 5.1Ghz all the time.
> 
> It's not due to windows power options (minimum processor state set to 10%)
> If I set maximum power state to less than 100%, the frequency does drop.
> 
> Tried updating the Bios.
> 
> I cant figure out what setting in Bios allows it to downclock at idle, or if its related to a program thats running. (Tried killing any running applications that seemed to not be system critical)
> 
> Anyone got any suggestions?
> 
> (pictures from before I updated the bios)


As the last bios screen shot shows, your P1 freq is base turbo... so:

1) Multicore "MCE" to Auto. Disabling it is not relevant once you overclock manually - it can only work with default settings for multi and voltage.
2) Min cache freq to Auto (XMP will do this for a silly reason)
3) Look for EIST (speedstep) and Speedshift, assure that both are set to Auto or Enabled (XMPO can putz with these too).
If after this it works correctly. enjoy. If not, or if you want to purge the system of XMP settings and begin with a better OC (not one done by the guy programming the RAM EEPROM):

Simply note the primary ram timings, Dram voltage and speed. Then CLRCMOS, do not enable XMP - set your CPU OC. Does it down clock normally? If yes, now enter the ram timings, voltage and speed manually - F10 to save and exit. Viola.


----------



## Norlig

Jpmboy said:


> As the last bios screen shot shows, your P1 freq is base turbo... so:
> 
> 1) Multicore "MCE" to Auto. Disabling it is not relevant once you overclock manually - it can only work with default settings for multi and voltage.
> 2) Min cache freq to Auto (XMP will do this for a silly reason)
> 3) Look for EIST (speedstep) and Speedshift, assure that both are set to Auto or Enabled (XMPO can putz with these too).
> If after this it works correctly. enjoy. If not, or if you want to purge the system of XMP settings and begin with a better OC (not one done by the guy programming the RAM EEPROM):
> 
> Simply note the primary ram timings, Dram voltage and speed. Then CLRCMOS, do not enable XMP - set your CPU OC. Does it down clock normally? If yes, now enter the ram timings, voltage and speed manually - F10 to save and exit. Viola.


Thanks, Tried that, but it seems to have had no effect.

I tested setting the power options Plan to Balanced, then the CPU clocks started regulating again.
I had Ultimate performance selected before, but changed minimum processor state to 10%

Both High and ultimate performance would lock my clocks to the max turbo speed (5.1Ghz) , guess I'll rock with Balanced now.

Must've been a windows update or something...


----------



## Jpmboy

Norlig said:


> Thanks, Tried that, but it seems to have had no effect.
> 
> I tested setting the power options Plan to Balanced, then the CPU clocks started regulating again.
> I had Ultimate performance selected before, but changed minimum processor state to 10%
> 
> Both High and ultimate performance would lock my clocks to the max turbo speed (5.1Ghz) , guess I'll rock with Balanced now.
> 
> Must've been a windows update or something...


in max or ultimate I'm pretty sure you need to have Processor thermal control set to active AND lower the min proc state to below 10%... I thought you had posted that you tried other power plans earlier.
anyways... Enjoy!


----------



## ViTosS

For some reason I can't use my USB BIOS FlashBack tool anymore, I do exact as the same I did in the past and it always worked, but this time I got 3-4x flashing blue and a solid blue after, I wanted to go back to BIOS 1003 after updating to newest one 2203, my RAM OC isn't the same on this newest BIOS.


----------



## Falkentyne

ViTosS said:


> For some reason I can't use my USB BIOS FlashBack tool anymore, I do exact as the same I did in the past and it always worked, but this time I got 3-4x flashing blue and a solid blue after, I wanted to go back to BIOS 1003 after updating to newest one 2203, my RAM OC isn't the same on this newest BIOS.


Some motherboards have a BIOS downgrade option in the AMI menus, which may be hidden. There is a modded AMIBCP 5.02.0031 by (I think) dsanke(?) that will let you open the flash file without it crashing with a too many strings error, which will allow you to examine what's there. If you can open it and you find a bios downgrade option, ask on Win-raid how to enable this option (DO NOT under any circumstances attempt to edit the original Asus binary file with AMIBCP, PERIOD). Lost N Bios can help you do that. Of course that's at your own risk.

Usually after such a change is done and the option enabled, you have to load defaults after the flash to get that option into CMOS memory. Then you should be able to flash back to an older version.


----------



## BotSkill

ViTosS said:


> For some reason I can't use my USB BIOS FlashBack tool anymore, I do exact as the same I did in the past and it always worked, but this time I got 3-4x flashing blue and a solid blue after, I wanted to go back to BIOS 1003 after updating to newest one 2203, my RAM OC isn't the same on this newest BIOS.


Try other USB stick. It happened to me too with some USB sticks and worked well with others. And don't forget to rename bios to M10H.cap for USB Bios FlashBack to work.


----------



## kevindd992002

So I've been using my G. Skill 2x8GB sticks at XMP with my ASUS Maximus X Code and 8700K for a few years now and they were pretty much stable up to this point where I had an out of the nowhere BSOD while Win 10 was just on the desktop. 

I thought it was one time thing and I let it go (just forced reboot). But then it started BSOD'ing again until it came to a point where the machine wasn't able to POST anymore with Q code 55 (no memory installed). Tried MemOK, Clear CMOS, ReTry, etc. to no avail.

I then started testing my RAM modules. 
1. Switched both modules from A2/B2 slots to A1/B1 -> TEST FAILED
2. Removed stick2 and tested stick1 in each or the 4 slots -> ALL TESTS FAILED
3. Removed stick1 and tested stick2 -> ALL TESTS SUCCEEDED!

I mean, it's obvious to me that stick1's the culrpit and I need to send back to G. Skill but I guess I just wanted to pick your brains out and wanted confirmation, which is why I posted. I've had my fair share of bad RAM modules in the past but never to the point that it won't let my machine POST. 

Any thoughts? Thanks.


----------



## KedarWolf

ViTosS said:


> For some reason I can't use my USB BIOS FlashBack tool anymore, I do exact as the same I did in the past and it always worked, but this time I got 3-4x flashing blue and a solid blue after, I wanted to go back to BIOS 1003 after updating to newest one 2203, my RAM OC isn't the same on this newest BIOS.


Format the USB with RUFUS as a non-bootable MBR FAT32 USB and try. Also rename the BIOS according to what board you have, should be in the manual.


https://rufus.ie/


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> So I've been using my G. Skill 2x8GB sticks at XMP with my ASUS Maximus X Code and 8700K for a few years now and they were pretty much stable up to this point where I had an out of the nowhere BSOD while Win 10 was just on the desktop.
> 
> I thought it was one time thing and I let it go (just forced reboot). But then it started BSOD'ing again until it came to a point where the machine wasn't able to POST anymore with Q code 55 (no memory installed). Tried MemOK, Clear CMOS, ReTry, etc. to no avail.
> 
> I then started testing my RAM modules.
> 1. Switched both modules from A2/B2 slots to A1/B1 -> TEST FAILED
> 2. Removed stick2 and tested stick1 in each or the 4 slots -> ALL TESTS FAILED
> 3. Removed stick1 and tested stick2 -> ALL TESTS SUCCEEDED!
> 
> I mean, it's obvious to me that stick1's the culrpit and I need to send back to G. Skill but I guess I just wanted to pick your brains out and wanted confirmation, which is why I posted. I've had my fair share of bad RAM modules in the past but never to the point that it won't let my machine POST.
> 
> Any thoughts? Thanks.


What VSA and VCCIO did XMP set over that time? But yeah, these things do fail at times. Failing post is a common final EOL for the little guys.


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> What VSA and VCCIO did XMP set over that time? But yeah, these things do fail at times. Failing post is a common final EOL for the little guys.


I have to be honest and forgot. I was about to begin overclocking this system actually as I have the spare time because of the whole lockdown situation until this happened, lol. I'm a bit glad it's just the RAM that acted up, actually. It's the easiest component that can be pulled out and RMA'd 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


----------



## DStealth

VCCIO and SA are voltages in the CPU if they degraded due high voltages from "auto" XMP ...RMAing the memory sticks won't help you...
I can't belive how many users are useing unsafe 24/7 voltages from XMP i.e for 3200/3600 modules XMP sets 1.4+ for auto...where my CPU can run 4300cl14 with 1.225 and 1.25v manual respectively


----------



## kevindd992002

DStealth said:


> VCCIO and SA are voltages in the CPU if they degraded due high voltages from "auto" XMP ...RMAing the memory sticks won't help you...
> I can't belive how many users are useing unsafe 24/7 voltages from XMP i.e for 3200/3600 modules XMP sets 1.4+ for auto...where my CPU can run 4300cl14 with 1.225 and 1.25v manual respectively


I didn't expect this answer. This is really bad if this is the reason. I hadn't had time to optimize my BIOS overclock settings for a couple of years since I built the system and didn't really notice what were the VCCIO and SA voltages while I'm at XMP. I had thought that XMP only really sets the DRAM voltages and frequencies.

Is this true for 3200 XMP sets though? Do they all set the voltages to unsafe values? How would I know now that I have one stick that has gone bad? I guess I can boot the motherboard with just the working stick, set it to XMP, and see what the VCCIO and VSA voltages are? Is that an accurate test?

Also, what is the explanation behind one stick going bad if it's a degraded CPU? If it was a degraded CPU, won't plugging in either stick make the system NOT POST?


----------



## DStealth

Yes you can make such test. If you have one stick good and one bad probably the IMC is fine. If you can work with one stick but not in dual channel could be the IMC issue.


----------



## kevindd992002

DStealth said:


> Yes you can make such test. If you have one stick good and one bad probably the IMC is fine. If you can work with one stick but not in dual channel could be the IMC issue.


Ok, with the working stick set to XMP I got the voltages in the attached file. 

VCCIO = 1.336V
VSA = 1.144V

Are those insanely high voltages on the IMC? Would those Auto values different if both sticks were plugged in and working?

I'm looking for a spare DDR4 RAM kit that I can test with to isolate if dual channel is an issue. So if, say, another 2133MHz kit works in dual channel in my system, then the IMC is probably fine?


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> Ok, with the working stick set to XMP I got the voltages in the attached file.
> 
> VCCIO = 1.336V
> VSA = 1.144V
> 
> Are those insanely high voltages on the IMC? Would those Auto values different if both sticks were plugged in and working?
> 
> I'm looking for a spare DDR4 RAM kit that I can test with to isolate if dual channel is an issue. So if, say, another 2133MHz kit works in dual channel in my system, then the IMC is probably fine?


Yeah, I'm sure that XMP 3200 does not need anywhere near 1.336V VSA. Once you get the other stick back, if you do use XMP (ever) again  I'd lower VSA by at least 100mV. Not that it is the cause of the stick failing, but why overvolt any setting?


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, I'm sure that XMP 3200 does not need anywhere near 1.336V VSA. Once you get the other stick back, if you do use XMP (ever) again  I'd lower VSA by at least 100mV. Not that it is the cause of the stick failing, but why overvolt any setting?


Right, but is the possibility of IMC degradation high with these voltages?

EDIT: I'm trying to think hard if my personal system was the one I had XMP set on. I might've been confused with the fact that the most recent system I built (for my sister) was the one I had XMP set on (3700X with G. Skill RAM modules also) as linked here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...te-x570-aorus-owners-thread-post28180124.html

I have 9/5/2019 screenshots of the UEFI pages of my personal ASUS Maximus X Code system and I didn't have XMP set there but I'm not a 100% sure that those were the latest settings I had before one of the RAM sticks failed. I have a gut feeling that I read about the VCCIO/VCSA voltage being high when set to Auto with these boards which prevented me from blindly enabling XMP in the first place. Is there a way, perhaps in Windows 10, for me to verify what the "historical" values of VCCIO and VCSA were?


----------



## Falkentyne

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, I'm sure that XMP 3200 does not need anywhere near 1.336V VSA. Once you get the other stick back, if you do use XMP (ever) again  I'd lower VSA by at least 100mV. Not that it is the cause of the stick failing, but why overvolt any setting?


In Elmor's video with his 4300 mhz sticks, hes using 1.5v VCCSA and 1.40v VCCIO and doesn't care one bit. And I trust Elmor.

But this is 10th gen.

The intel spec sheet says SA can go up to 1.52v, and there's no loadline calibration to mess things up like there is with 1.52v vcore (which is only max safe with 1.1 mOhms LLC (10th gen) or 1.6 mOhms (9th gen) or 2.1 mOhms (6 core 9th gen or 8th gen).


----------



## Jpmboy

kevindd992002 said:


> Right, but is the possibility of IMC degradation high with these voltages?
> 
> EDIT: I'm trying to think hard if my personal system was the one I had XMP set on. I might've been confused with the fact that the most recent system I built (for my sister) was the one I had XMP set on (3700X with G. Skill RAM modules also) as linked here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...te-x570-aorus-owners-thread-post28180124.html
> 
> I have 9/5/2019 screenshots of the UEFI pages of my personal ASUS Maximus X Code system and I didn't have XMP set there but I'm not a 100% sure that those were the latest settings I had before one of the RAM sticks failed. I have a gut feeling that I read about the VCCIO/VCSA voltage being high when set to Auto with these boards which prevented me from blindly enabling XMP in the first place. Is there a way, perhaps in Windows 10, for me to verify what the "historical" values of VCCIO and VCSA were?


it's not likely that 1.2-ish VSA is gonna damage an 8700K. That's a pretty robust cpu. It just that XMP programming is necessarily set to accomodate the range of CPUs the ram is on the market with... and the entire range of silicon wins and losses. Think of it like "Auto Volt". Two 4 letter words banned by overclockers. 


Falkentyne said:


> In Elmor's video with his 4300 mhz sticks, hes using 1.5v VCCSA and 1.40v VCCIO and doesn't care one bit. And I trust Elmor.
> But this is 10th gen.
> The intel spec sheet says SA can go up to 1.52v, and there's no loadline calibration to mess things up like there is with 1.52v vcore (which is only max safe with 1.1 mOhms LLC (10th gen) or 1.6 mOhms (9th gen) or 2.1 mOhms (6 core 9th gen or 8th gen).
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osMrZNeguQk&feature=emb_logo


Yeah, Skylake and Cascade lake are that different. INtel spec limits are pretty complex in that the ceiling for one is set with all other rails/frequencies/temperatures at default limits - when you start pushing multiple rails higher is when the specs are very "optimistic". If you look at the fine print in their spec sheets, it always says "limit when all other parameters are within the acceptable operating range" or something like that. you can trust Elmor, but remember he gets his gear free. :thumb:


----------



## kevindd992002

Jpmboy said:


> it's not likely that 1.2-ish VSA is gonna damage an 8700K. That's a pretty robust cpu. It just that XMP programming is necessarily set to accomodate the range of CPUs the ram is on the market with... and the entire range of silicon wins and losses. Think of it like "Auto Volt". Two 4 letter words banned by overclockers.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, Skylake and Cascade lake are that different. INtel spec limits are pretty complex in that the ceiling for one is set with all other rails/frequencies/temperatures at default limits - when you start pushing multiple rails higher is when the specs are very "optimistic". If you look at the fine print in their spec sheets, it always says "limit when all other parameters are within the acceptable operating range" or something like that. you can trust Elmor, but remember he gets his gear free. :thumb:


Right, though I'm more worried about the VCCIO reaching around 1.34V rather than VSA reaching around 1.2V. I guess I won't have proof of degradation until I proceed with the overclock of the whole system (which I'll be doing very soon).

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


----------



## Robostyle

What is the best, in terms of OC, bios ver to choose for M10H(wifi)?


----------



## DStealth

The latest one is very solid. While tested all the BIOSes for this board since day 1 I get best results with the last one. OS and Spi32M are not optimized...just a casual run while having background proccesses with the latest BIOS.


----------



## japau

Hi everyone,











Still running BIOS1003 and wondering about the later released BIOSes;

Seems the memory prices have gone down quite a lot since Coffee lake release times and managed to grab pair of F4-4400C19D-16GTZSW 's cheap. So wondering if i should upgrade BIOS before start tuning them.

Thought to stick with the 8700k for the RTX 3000 series era as it doesn't seem to lack much gaming performance to the big brothers out there.

Anyone cycled through the many later BIOS releases and found major updates to memory OC / stability for Z370 X Apex Board that make it worthwhile to upgrade?


----------



## Jpmboy

japau said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> View attachment 2460754
> 
> 
> 
> Still running BIOS1003 and wondering about the later released BIOSes;
> 
> Seems the memory prices have gone down quite a lot since Coffee lake release times and managed to grab pair of F4-4400C19D-16GTZSW 's cheap. So wondering if i should upgrade BIOS before start tuning them.
> 
> Thought to stick with the 8700k for the RTX 3000 series era as it doesn't seem to lack much gaming performance to the big brothers out there.
> 
> Anyone cycled through the many later BIOS releases and found major updates to memory OC / stability for Z370 X Apex Board that make it worthwhile to upgrade?


I'd update the bios. My Apex X is running bios 2102 with an 8086K (or on occasion an 8700K(ES)). Ram is at 4400c16 (g skill b-die, 2x8GB) with 1.45V. As stable as I can measure. I'll be putting a 3090FTW3 on the board next week... you will not be lacking any gaming performance!


----------



## Blatsz32

just a quick question..I currently have a z270/7700k with custom watercooling and I wanted to but a 9900k combo off Newegg, my only hesitation is needing to get new block. Will my current block fit on the z390 without needing special mounting hardware?


----------



## Blatsz32

Apologies, i may have posted this before but, am I able to take my cpu watercooling block on the z270 and mount it to a z390 without needing additional hardware. I'd like to get a 9900k but i don't want to have to get a new block. Omg im sorry double post! I'm getting used to this new sites format.


----------



## chibi

Blatsz32 said:


> Apologies, i may have posted this before but, am I able to take my cpu watercooling block on the z270 and mount it to a z390 without needing additional hardware. I'd like to get a 9900k but i don't want to have to get a new block. Omg im sorry double post! I'm getting used to this new sites format.


z270/z390/z490 is same mounting pattern for blocks.


----------



## Blatsz32

chibi said:


> z270/z390/z490 is same mounting pattern for blocks.


Awesome ty for the reply chibi


----------



## nezff

This is what asus is trying to do to me. In sent in the motherhood because of a red led cpu light lit. No display. Pc was running but no display. Board is a asus prime z390a. No issues for two solid years. It just sits in a case. After speaking to support they said send in for repair under warranty. I packed it up in original box and placed cover back on the cpu socket. I receive a email today a week later that they want me to pay for damage to the board. There was nothing wrong with the board upon leaving my hands. Pics and their pics.















It was damaged by them or shipping. I'll keep this updated. I will not buy another asus product if this is the case.


----------



## bscool

@nezff I have heard similar stories before about people RMAing MBs to Asus and then Asus come back with it has bent pins when it was sent in it had none. Hard to believe, a company would operate like that.


----------



## nezff

bscool said:


> @nezff I have heard similar stories before about people RMAing MBs to Asus and then Asus come back with it has bent pins when it was sent in it had none. Hard to believe, a company would operate like that.


Yep. I found more stories on Google and reddit. This is pretty bad.


----------



## D-EJ915

That sucks man, Asus is the only vendor that comes to mind that somehow smashes your socket when you RMA.


----------



## nezff

D-EJ915 said:


> That sucks man, Asus is the only vendor that comes to mind that somehow smashes your socket when you RMA.


Agreed. I have posted this on Twitter. Also sent a email to the ceo office.


----------



## bigblueshock

I have a ROG MAXIMUS XI HERO. It will have 4 Dual Rank DIMM's (64GB Total). Assuming there is no overclocking going on (all settings stock, even Memory, not even XMP), are there any voltages that should be adjusted for stability for populating all 4 dimms with dual rank? Such as VCCSA, or even memory voltage?

I guess I will try stock first, but if unstable, what should I adjust?


----------



## Jpmboy

bigblueshock said:


> I have a ROG MAXIMUS XI HERO. It will have 4 Dual Rank DIMM's (64GB Total). Assuming there is no overclocking going on (all settings stock, even Memory, not even XMP), are there any voltages that should be adjusted for stability for populating all 4 dimms with dual rank? Such as VCCSA, or even memory voltage?
> 
> I guess I will try stock first, but if unstable, what should I adjust?


if they are unstable when running at stock and with the voltages set to Auto, then no. Search "TM5" here at OCN, download the program (by mismus1 ??) and test the stability. Or use GSAT running under the windows Linux shell.


----------



## 8bitG33k

A few days ago I decided to play around with the AI overclocking feature on my Z390-A Prime. CPU is 9900k. I went into the BIOS and set the CPU core ratio to "AI" from previously "Auto".

Next, I got several bluescreens upon booting. So I decided to end this little experiment and go back to "Auto".

Since then my CPU will no longer clock to 5.1GHz like it did originally out of the box. It only clocks to 4.8GHz now.

How can I get the previous clock speed back?

Specs:
i9-9900k
Asus Z390-A Prime
EVGA 2070 SUPER XC ULTRA (08G-P4-3173-KR)
2x16GB Corsair Vengeance (CMW32GX4M2C3200C16W)
970 EVO 256GB (OS)
860 EVO 1TB
870 EVO 2TB


----------



## Jpmboy

What voltage were you running 5.1GHz at?


----------



## Avacado

Jpmboy said:


> What voltage were you running 5.1GHz at?


So this is where you have been hiding.


----------



## Jpmboy

Hey buddy! lol, just doing a drive-by I guess. 🖖


----------



## Avacado

Jpmboy said:


> Hey buddy! lol, just doing a drive-by I guess. 🖖


Do more of them, and come say hi on EX every now and again. Stay warm in Phila this weekend.


----------



## Jpmboy

Will do. I've been indulging in other hobbies/obsessions lately! Been real cold in the garage!


----------

